Slashdot Mirror


Reclaiming Oil Rigs As Oceanic Eco-Resorts

Mike writes "Here's an innovative reuse for those old abandoned oil rigs littering the ocean — convert them into eco resorts. Morris Architects' Oil Rig Platform Resort and Spa makes use of one of 4,000 oil rigs out in the Gulf of Mexico and transforms it into a beacon of sustainability, re-imagining an iconic source of dirty energy as an eco-haven that generates all of its power from renewable sources."

124 comments

  1. Or a private micro-nation strong hold! by mc1138 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Why settle for something weak like a resort when you could have your own micro nation. If it worked for these guys http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Sealand why not you or I?!

    1. Re:Or a private micro-nation strong hold! by von_rick · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think it was The Pirate Bay that wanted to buy this nation to save their asses from legal hassles they might've faced in other countries. There was some glitch in that deal and it didn't go through as they expected. Or maybe it was some other bittorrent listing site.

      --

      Face your daemons!

    2. Re:Or a private micro-nation strong hold! by Abreu · · Score: 1

      Are these guys still operating? I thought their ideas for a "neutral nation hosting content of cuestionable legality" had fallen through...

      --
      No sig for the moment.
    3. Re:Or a private micro-nation strong hold! by oodaloop · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yeah, TPB wanted to buy it, but Sealand was asking for a fortune. The glitch, aside from it being way too much money, is that you can't sell a nation. Besides, no one has recognized Sealand as a nation. A passport from them, which you can buy, wouldn't be worth the paper on which it was printed.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    4. Re:Or a private micro-nation strong hold! by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      Besides, no one has recognized Sealand as a nation.

      Did anyone do anything about it though? If not, you could at least get away with semi-independant nation status, where you were independant unless you provoked a nearby real nation to do something. Which seems to me to be somewhat true of those real nations anyway, Iraq and Afghanistan are proof that you only have independance if nobody cares to disagree with you or you can force them to leave you alone.

      Steal an ICBM, buy an oil rig, and THEN claim you're an independant nation and you might have a better case for nation status.

    5. Re:Or a private micro-nation strong hold! by Amazing+Quantum+Man · · Score: 1

      Obviously, they should have started their data haven in the Sultanate of Kinakuta.

      --
      Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
    6. Re:Or a private micro-nation strong hold! by mc1138 · · Score: 1

      Sealand's claims to autonomy are pretty debated, but, they have a more realistic claim then the hundreds of other so called micronations, many of which are just guy's houses that they have changed into a sort of fantasy land with themselves as king. Read the Wiki article for Sealand's past dealings with other countries.

    7. Re:Or a private micro-nation strong hold! by oodaloop · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The UK never bothered to deal with Sealand; it apparently didn't warrant the attention, bad publicity from a raid gone bad, or the time and money necessary to do anything about it. Harboring a wmd on a small rig just 6 miles off the shore of a major power like UK is just asking for trouble. The Royal Marines could take that thing over without even getting out of breath. It's essentially too small and too close to be defendable. As a former US Marine and senior intelligence analyst, that's my opinion anyway. YMMV.

      If you just wanted to say you're the Supreme Dictator for Life of a small island nation, then go for it. But it's kind of pointless to make and sell passports that no one else recognizes. Pretty useless, really.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    8. Re:Or a private micro-nation strong hold! by snspdaarf · · Score: 1

      It worked until they managed to let it catch on fire. There was only a watchman there, and the place got rather torn up.

      --
      Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!
    9. Re:Or a private micro-nation strong hold! by hardburn · · Score: 3, Informative

      Taking the assumption that Sealand is a legitimate nation (for the sake of argument), I'm afraid you can no longer replicate that success on with an oil rig. The first problem is that nations have extended their territories into international waters a lot farther since Sealand was founded. If Sealand hadn't already been claimed, it would be in England's territory today.

      Secondly, a 1982 international law forbids artifical structures from being made into countries:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_Sealand#Territorial_limits
      According to the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, there is no transitional law and no possibility to consent to the existence of a construction which was previously approved or built by a neighbouring state. This means that artificial islands may no longer be constructed and then claimed as sovereign states, or as state territories, for the purposes of extension of an exclusive economic zone or of territorial waters.

      Note that this means that Sealand's claim must be legitimate prior to 1982 in order to be grandfathered in.

      --
      Not a typewriter
    10. Re:Or a private micro-nation strong hold! by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      Sealand's claims to autonomy are pretty debated, but, they have a more realistic claim then the hundreds of other so called micronations, many of which are just guy's houses that they have changed into a sort of fantasy land with themselves as king.

      You dare mock the sovreignty of "Awesomeville"!?! Step foot on our soil and you'll be beheaded!

    11. Re:Or a private micro-nation strong hold! by meringuoid · · Score: 3, Informative
      Did anyone do anything about it though? If not, you could at least get away with semi-independant nation status, where you were independant unless you provoked a nearby real nation to do something.

      Sealand has never quite provoked Britain badly enough to be invaded. The military cost of annexing Sealand would be trivial; the problem would be the legal situation. It could be argued that Britain has implicitly recognised Sealand in the past; for a start, there was a court decision in 1968 that Sealand was outside British jurisdiction, which was cited ten years later by the British government as a reason to do nothing about a German being held prisoner in Sealand after a failed coup d'etat.

      It would take months to sort out, and be the most spectacular media circus in the meantime. Awfully embarrassing. And then there's the PR end of things. You'd need sound propaganda to paint the Sealanders as, oh, a bunch of crazed armed thugs on an old sea fort with a habit of taking pot shots at passing ships - otherwise you'd look the most awful bully, sending the SBS or someone to take over the smallest country in the world.

      If shooting at the Royal Navy didn't do it, I doubt running a pirate BitTorrent tracker service out of Sealand would be sufficient provocation for a British invasion to go ahead. After all, the place was founded by a pirate radio operator in the first place, it would only be in keeping with proud Sealand tradition. I suspect British policy is simply to quietly ignore the entire thing and wait for Prince Roy to die, or at least grow old enough to want to live somewhere slightly more comfortable - and then demolish the place once it's abandoned.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    12. Re:Or a private micro-nation strong hold! by Bearhouse · · Score: 1

      I seem to remember that (maybe prompted by the Sealand debate), the UN changed the rules so that any artifical island cannot qualify for statehood, (even if it's outside territorial waters).

    13. Re:Or a private micro-nation strong hold! by ravenshrike · · Score: 1

      Except for the minor matter that UN conventions aren't actually international law. For one, the US does not recognize it as law unless the senate were to ratify it, although given the people currently in power if TPB did try this route there would almost certainly be a party line vote on it.

    14. Re:Or a private micro-nation strong hold! by dwye · · Score: 1

      If you just wanted to say you're the Supreme Dictator for Life of a small island nation, then go for it. But it's kind of pointless to make and sell passports that no one else recognizes. Pretty useless, really.

      It isn't pointless to sell them, anymore than it is pointless to sell diplomas from Miskatonic University; it may be pointless to buy them, of course, unless as a souvenier or novelty item.

      And of course, you never know when it might work. Several American Indian tribes have issued passports that were treated as valid (usually by countries that were ticked of at the US at the time).

    15. Re:Or a private micro-nation strong hold! by sexconker · · Score: 1

      Fact: 11% of all Sim City cities, Animal Crossing towns, etc. are named Awesomeville.

      Fact: This is awesome.

    16. Re:Or a private micro-nation strong hold! by sexconker · · Score: 1

      The UN? Who gives a shit what they say.

    17. Re:Or a private micro-nation strong hold! by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Yeah, TPB wanted to buy it, but Sealand was asking for a fortune.

      They could just buy an old freighter and park it somewhere in international waters.

    18. Re:Or a private micro-nation strong hold! by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Steal an ICBM, buy an oil rig, and THEN claim you're an independant nation and you might have a better case for nation status.

      As an Australian I believe you shouldn't be a nation unless you are surrounded by water. That would certainly save on seats in the UN.

    19. Re:Or a private micro-nation strong hold! by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      I seem to remember that (maybe prompted by the Sealand debate), the UN changed the rules so that any artifical island cannot qualify for statehood, (even if it's outside territorial waters).

      So what is an artificial island? People in my country live in artificial structures on solid land. Sealand in an artificial structure on solid sea floor. What about a country in the pacific which gets drowned by rising sea levels? Do they lose nationhood even if they build up their island with buildings and North American trash?

    20. Re:Or a private micro-nation strong hold! by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Yeah but then the data haven actually belongs to the Sultan.

    21. Re:Or a private micro-nation strong hold! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A lot more people than give a shit what you say.

    22. Re:Or a private micro-nation strong hold! by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 1

      Funny, mine are all called Matrix.

    23. Re:Or a private micro-nation strong hold! by MadUndergrad · · Score: 1

      Hey, my MU degree gets me access to their library and there are some very rare books there. Pointless indeed!

    24. Re:Or a private micro-nation strong hold! by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Unless Prince Roy appoints a new leader.
      You can't sell a nation, but you sure as hell can pay your way to leader status.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    25. Re:Or a private micro-nation strong hold! by geekoid · · Score: 1

      um..
      "for the purposes of extension of an exclusive economic zone or of territorial waters."

      So you can't pop up a rig, say hey we've expanded are territory to this new spot, suck it.

      It in no way covers new territories.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    26. Re:Or a private micro-nation strong hold! by cas2000 · · Score: 1

      what's this "surrounded by water" nonsense? some sort of overly poetic kind of tortured english??

      the correct phrase is "girt by sea"!

  2. Yay! by jetsci · · Score: 0

    I can see it now, "Honey, we're going on vacation!"

    "No, I won't sign the divorce papers..."

    --
    Bored at work? Play Game!
    1. Re:Yay! by jetsci · · Score: 1

      Really though...I imagine the logistics of getting people to one of these out-weight the costs of going to Mexico or something. Whats the point? Enough with this "Green or bust" junk. There is a line and I think we're crossing it.
      *kicks desktop recycling jar over*
      *walks to corner of office and kicks over blue recycling bin*
      *goes on office rampage*
      *dies of compound foot fracture*

      --
      Bored at work? Play Game!
    2. Re:Yay! by internerdj · · Score: 1

      What do you use at your desk that will fit in a jar for recycling that you can't use over and over again instead?

    3. Re:Yay! by jetsci · · Score: 1

      Post-its mostly...they add colour and contrast to my work space and they're easy to replace.

      --
      Bored at work? Play Game!
    4. Re:Yay! by Abreu · · Score: 1

      Besides, there are a lot of smaller, "green and sustainable" resorts in Mexico available...

      --
      No sig for the moment.
    5. Re:Yay! by Grishnakh · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Except that, in Mexico, you're very likely to be kidnapped, and then have your head cut off when your family doesn't pay the ransom.

      Any traveler with half a brain would be avoiding Mexico like the plague right now. If you want to visit scenic Caribbean locations, there's lots of great places: the US and British Virgin Islands, Aruba, Belize, Honduras (esp. Roatan), etc.

    6. Re:Yay! by Hordeking · · Score: 1

      What do you use at your desk that will fit in a jar for recycling that you can't use over and over again instead?

      Pee. He lives as a recluse in his mommy's basement.

      --
      Disclaimer: The opinions and actions of the US Gov't are in no way representative of those held by this author or its ci
    7. Re:Yay! by Abreu · · Score: 1

      Nah!

      Tourists are generally safe in CancÃn, Cozumel, Acapulco, Puerto Vallarta, etc... Even criminals are aware that a 90% of the cashflow of the town comes from tourism, so they avoid harrasing tourists and target wealthy locals instead

      Now, in Tijuana, JuÃrez, Mexicali and other border towns, I agree that gringos are fair game

      This is Abreu, reporting from Mexico City!

      --
      No sig for the moment.
    8. Re:Yay! by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Puerto Rico would be good too; Americans don't even need a passport for it!

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    9. Re:Yay! by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      The fact that the Mexican people and their corrupt government allow this situation to continue is a good enough reason to just boycott the entire country, IMO.

  3. Aren't oceanic oil rigs already eco-resorts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...for corals and the fish and the eco-systems that grow up around them?

     

    1. Re:Aren't oceanic oil rigs already eco-resorts... by Greg_D · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's common knowledge to anyone who pays attention that the only reason east and west coasters are so against oil drilling in their backyards is because they don't want it to affect beachfront property values. Oil rigs are largely a huge boon to the local fish populations, because they are essentially giant man-made reefs.

      Abandoned oil rigs need to remain abandoned, at least during hurricane season. Last thing emergency officials need are a bunch of earth-firsters not following protocol and being stranded in the middle of a storm. It makes a lot more sense to topple the rigs.

    2. Re:Aren't oceanic oil rigs already eco-resorts... by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1, Insightful

      If you'd seen all of the work it took to clean San Francisco Bay up from one oil ship that just bumped a bridge pier, you'd not be writing that. Months of intensive work, then about a year of oil turning up in nooks and crannies that had to be scrubbed out.

    3. Re:Aren't oceanic oil rigs already eco-resorts... by CannonballHead · · Score: 2, Funny

      Sounds to me like it "created jobs" and thus "stimulated the economy" though... ;) :)

    4. Re:Aren't oceanic oil rigs already eco-resorts... by R2.0 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Abandoned oil rigs need to remain abandoned, at least during hurricane season. Last thing emergency officials need are a bunch of earth-firsters not following protocol and being stranded in the middle of a storm. It makes a lot more sense to topple the rigs.

      Q. What do call a bunch of eco-tourists lost at sea when an abandoned oil rig collapses?

      A. A good start

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    5. Re:Aren't oceanic oil rigs already eco-resorts... by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 1

      Unlike a tanker, an oil rig (especially a nonoperational/abandoned one) is unlikely to contain significant amounts of oil. All oil would be removed from the rig prior to abandonment - it makes no sense to just abandon a valuable commodity on a structure.

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    6. Re:Aren't oceanic oil rigs already eco-resorts... by jandrese · · Score: 1

      Oil rigs don't store mass amounts of oil though, at least not the ones that have been decommissioned like these have.

      Frankly the safety issues are a lot trickier. Oil rigs aren't the safest places to be to begin with, and when you neglect the maintenance for years it can't get any better.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    7. Re:Aren't oceanic oil rigs already eco-resorts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's common knowledge to anyone who pays attention that the only reason east and west coasters are so against oil drilling in their backyards is because they don't want it to affect beachfront property values.

      Oil rigs = oil spills.
      And oil spills pollute beaches, which is bad for tourism.

      Tourism is worth much more to States like Florida and California than the taxes they collect from beachfront property.

    8. Re:Aren't oceanic oil rigs already eco-resorts... by Greg_D · · Score: 1

      You don't know the difference between a tanker and a rig, so your point is moot and your opinion invalidated.

    9. Re:Aren't oceanic oil rigs already eco-resorts... by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      I'm not concerned with non-operational ones if the well has been properly capped. Operational ones have to be offloaded - to tankers.

    10. Re:Aren't oceanic oil rigs already eco-resorts... by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      Smileys are appropriate because of course that's the Broken Window Fallacy. Oil operators are supposed to, collectively, keep recovery staff on retainer and ready to go at the harbor. So, I think they get paid whether there's an emergency or not. I don't know all of the details. A lot of them seem to be firemen.

    11. Re:Aren't oceanic oil rigs already eco-resorts... by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      Tosh. Tankers pull up to the oil platforms to be filled with oil. There are a few that are very close to the shore that can pipe their oil in, but the far offshore ones have no other way of transporting the oil than to fill a ship with it.

    12. Re:Aren't oceanic oil rigs already eco-resorts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's common knowledge to anyone who pays attention that the only reason east and west coasters are so against oil drilling in their backyards is because they don't want it to affect beachfront property values.

      It's common knowledge to the east and west coasters that the oil companies will not insure the coastline against any leaks and will likely fight any attempt to make them pay for the damage their equipment causes should a leak occur.

      See also: Exxon, whose supreme court win after nearly a decade of fighting over the Valdez spill made it quite clear that the US government will not stand for people attempting to hold oil companies responsible for their actions.

    13. Re:Aren't oceanic oil rigs already eco-resorts... by sexconker · · Score: 1

      But it's not worth as much as the oil.

    14. Re:Aren't oceanic oil rigs already eco-resorts... by TastyCakes · · Score: 1

      While I hate to be pedantic, there are oil production platforms off the west coast near santa barbara. You go past them when you take a ferry to the channel islands. They are Chevron facilities, put there before the offshore moratorium was enacted. In fact, I believe it was a famous oil seep from these facilities that pushed the moratorium through.

    15. Re:Aren't oceanic oil rigs already eco-resorts... by ksheff · · Score: 1

      Not if they build pipelines out to the well like what is done in the Gulf of Mexico.

      --
      the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
  4. Don't forget the guns! by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They'll probably need to employ a pretty good sized security force if they want to ward off pirates--and yes, I'm being serious.

    --
    Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    1. Re:Don't forget the guns! by ArcadeX · · Score: 5, Informative

      I work for the maritime administration in the gulf, pirate aren't really a concern here. Too busy of a shipping lane, with too many patrols from the coast gaurd and navy. Most of these would be just outside US internation waters, pirates would have to be based inside the US to hit them in short range craft more commonly used.

      --
      An I.T. motto in the hands of an idiot is a dangerous thing...
    2. Re:Don't forget the guns! by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      I work for the maritime administration in the gulf, pirate aren't really a concern here yet.

      FTFY

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    3. Re:Don't forget the guns! by meringuoid · · Score: 3, Informative
      Most of these would be just outside US internation waters, pirates would have to be based inside the US to hit them in short range craft more commonly used.

      The Somali pirates have been getting bolder lately. Nowadays they set out in large ships with long range, and deploy short-range fast craft from that mothership to launch the actual attack. The Sirius Star was halfway to Madagascar when it was taken.

      Still, the reason pirates flourish in Somalia is that it is an anarchy close to a major shipping route. Although there are plenty of nations in the region with weak governments, I don't think there's any outright anarchic state in the Caribbean that might form a pirate haven. And, as you say, it would be a bold pirate who operated in the back yard of the US Navy. The Gulf of Aden isn't any great power's particular patch, and hasn't been since the fall of the Empire; the same cannot be said for the Caribbean. So far the Somali pirates haven't upset any major power badly enough for a serious effort to be made to eradicate them; even so, it's clear that the Indians in particular are near the limit of their patience, and many other nations have been sending warships to the region.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    4. Re:Don't forget the guns! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also worth noting that one of the first major acts of the US Navy was against pirates in the Mediterranean ("to the shores of Tripoli" in the Marine Hymn). Agreed that few would be suicidal enough to piss off a navy that is more powerful than the rest of the world's combined.

    5. Re:Don't forget the guns! by khallow · · Score: 1

      The Somali pirates have been getting bolder lately. Nowadays they set out in large ships with long range, and deploy short-range fast craft from that mothership to launch the actual attack. The Sirius Star was halfway to Madagascar when it was taken.

      I was going to say something smarmy about the lack of Somali pirates in the Gulf of Mexico. But let's just look at what's needed. There's no massive pirating infrastructure like that so close to the US. Nor, with the active presence of the US Coast Guard and a stable, cooperative Mexico, will pirates be a serious problem in the Gulf of Mexico.

    6. Re:Don't forget the guns! by khallow · · Score: 1

      Fixed what? Why is piracy going to get worse? I can't figure out cute, context-free quips.

    7. Re:Don't forget the guns! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or the terrorists...
      http://www.amazon.co.uk/One-Fine-Day-Middle-Night/dp/0349112096/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1235136635&sr=8-4

  5. Re:Super rich rejoice! by Hijacked+Public · · Score: 2, Informative

    Luckily, although you wouldn't know it from the submission and have to pay close attention to the article to figure it out, no one is actually doing any of this.

    It is just a set of drawings entered into a design competition.

    --
    "Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
  6. Yes, but... by CaptainPatent · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Can the resorts withstand category 5 hurricane force winds? Seems to me that with only 1 helipad you may have a huge and dangerous bottleneck to evacuating quickly.

    --
    Well, back to rejecting software patent applications.
    1. Re:Yes, but... by damn_registrars · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Seems to me that with only 1 helipad you may have a huge and dangerous bottleneck to evacuating quickly.

      Now I am not exactly an expert on oil rigs, but it seems to me that this rig is on the ocean. And generally oceans are full of water. I'm pretty sure we figured out a way to move people over water a while ago without using helicopters.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    2. Re:Yes, but... by camperdave · · Score: 1

      Hurricanes don't form quickly. You would have days to evacuate, if need be. Besides, you can fit a lot of people onto a cargo helicopter. Oh, and let's not forget the attached marina. Lots of people can leave by boat.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    3. Re:Yes, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You might want to ask on uer.ca They keep a pretty good list of places to explore around the world, and the community is pretty helpful.

  7. Lists of Rigs by Archon-X · · Score: 3, Interesting

    As an avid 'urban explorer' - an oil rig has long since been a hot target.
    Are there maintained lists of abandoned rigs?

    Anyone in the know?

    1. Re:Lists of Rigs by i.r.id10t · · Score: 2, Informative

      Check fishing web sites and/or charts with "good fishing areas" marked, also maybe check with dive shops. While you may be able to be in a boat next to the rig legally, you may be trespassing if you get up on the rig structure itself.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    2. Re:Lists of Rigs by swb · · Score: 1

      And from what I've seen it can be really hard to get on an oil rig without either landing on top of it with a helicopter or having someone crane you up (either via a larger boat with a crane or from the rig itself). It's not like you can just climb up, and the platform is often REALLY high off the water (10 stories?).

      It might actually be dangerous close to the rig due to submerged obstacles you can't see and/or wave action smashing you against the rig.

    3. Re:Lists of Rigs by sandmaninator · · Score: 1

      No Problem! Wait for a storm, let the wave action lift you to just below the platform, toss your grappling-hook onto the platform and climb up before the next wave hits.

    4. Re:Lists of Rigs by vertinox · · Score: 1

      While you may be able to be in a boat next to the rig legally, you may be trespassing if you get up on the rig structure itself.

      Are there oil rigs in international waters? Or are they too far out? I would assume there are some major ones in use as the drive to go deeper is brought on by the last oil crunch, but most liklye still used since they were further out.

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
    5. Re:Lists of Rigs by volxdragon · · Score: 1

      While you may be able to be in a boat next to the rig legally, you may be trespassing if you get up on the rig structure itself.

      If you were in international waters, it would be a LOT harder to prosecute (if possible at all)...are rigs even flagged like ships?

    6. Re:Lists of Rigs by Archon-X · · Score: 1

      Danger to myself is not so much of a concern.
      Danger to others is.

      Have my first helicopter to abandoned sea fort abseil coming up when the weather is nice.
      Would like to try for an oil rig.

      There has to be a database of these somewhere.

    7. Re:Lists of Rigs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rigs are very rarely in international waters because international waters are usually too deep for them to operate in, plus all offshore production that I know of is done under an agreement with a government that lays claim to the area. The rigs in the gulf of mexico, for example, are all in US federal or state waters. State waters extend to 3 miles I believe. Mexico has no offshore production in the gulf so far to my knowledge, so a huge part of the gulf is empty. In the North Sea, production and exploration was delayed until the boundaries were sorted out between the respective governments (largely norway and the UK).

    8. Re:Lists of Rigs by nstone97 · · Score: 1

      The MMS maintains a list of all platforms in Federal Waters. http://www.mms.gov/ Some platforms are very close to the coastline (~8 miles or less). The MMS does not allow oil companies to "abandon" oil rigs as they sit in the water. They have to remove the structure and topple it to form an artificial reef or bring it to shore for dismantling. To answer some of the other comments All platforms have a boat dock and a +12 (deck that is around 12 feet above mean sea level) with access to the upper decks. This provides alternate means for evacuation in the event of an emergency. You can get close to platforms in a boat if you wish but you can not leagally board the platform. Many platforms, those with a throughput greater than 100,000 barrels of oil per day, are regulated by both the MMS and the Coast Guard. So you are not just trespassing on private property but you are in violation of the Coast Guard as well. Platforms around the US are in US waters. None that I know of, are far enough out to be called International Waters. Some are far enough out that you have to file a flight plan with the FAA or a F-15 will pay you a visit on your way back in. While it is a nice idea, I do not see the idea of an offshore resort working because of a couple reasons -Companies do not spend the money to maintain a platform they are about to abandon -The cost to retrofit an offshore platform would be astronomical. (Offshore construction boat required to lift quarters or other large structures would cost over $100k a day) -Would be costly to maintain an offshore resort. Offshore is one of the most corrosive environments there is.

    9. Re:Lists of Rigs by TastyCakes · · Score: 1

      From what I've heard, there are tens of thousands of abandoned rigs in the world, and it would cost billions of dollars to dismantle them all properly (read: not going to happen). Until relatively recently, countries did not require oil companies to have "end of life" plans for drilling rigs or production platforms, and I suspect a lot of third world countries still don't. In the absence of these requirements, companies would do what made the most sense money-wise: run them empty and then just leave them. Of course big oil companies these days would never do that even if they were "allowed to", largely due to constant harassment from environmentalists (most American companies working offshore say they operate by "Gulf of Mexico standards" in all their operations, these being some of the most stringent standards in the world). But one could imagine a sketchy national oil company somewhere doing something similar even to this day. I'm not sure if you could find abandoned rigs very easily in the gulf. Laws requiring disposal have been around the longest here, so any abandoned rigs would be decades old, but they would be close to shore since "deep water operations" weren't really possible at that point. I think the US government has been trying to clear out the gulf, you can see Rigs to reefs for more on this. If you were to find any abandoned rig still standing near the US coast, it would undoubtedly be very dangerous to explore. One of the sunk ones, however, would likely make for great scuba diving.

  8. Do what they do with boats. by EkriirkE · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Clean and sink 'em.

    --
    from 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    to 45 2F 6E 40 3C DF 10 71 4E 41 DF AA 25 7D 31 3F
    1. Re:Do what they do with boats. by jbeaupre · · Score: 1

      They are sunk. Stuck right to the ocean floor. Knocking them over in deep water would just put them down so deep they wouldn't be nearly as much use to ocean life. Just another rusting hulk. If you mean detach them, tow them to shallow water, clean then sink em again, that may be a bit more trouble than anyone is willing to get into.

      --
      The world is made by those who show up for the job.
    2. Re:Do what they do with boats. by QuasiEvil · · Score: 1

      Or, better yet, torch them off at some depth so that they're no longer a navigation hazard and recycle the platform itself and upper superstructure. Seems silly to sink all that material. If you want to make artificial reefs, make them out of something cheap and plentiful, like formed concrete shapes.

    3. Re:Do what they do with boats. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      They usually clip off the tops of them and move them somewhere else to drill more oil. Those structures are multi million dollar platforms... You do not just sink them or abandon them.

      There are companies out there that just own the platforms and rent them out.

      These things are more like boats than towers.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_platform#Types

      In shallow waters they will tend to use fixed ones. But in deeper depths they just can not do it.

    4. Re:Do what they do with boats. by jbeaupre · · Score: 1

      That's kind of what I figured. Anything of value will be striped off. Didn't realize they reused entire platforms (other than multiple horizontal wells drilled from one rig). Always figured the important stuff was modular and only the skeleton was left. In any case, the legs are pretty interesting if left in place.

      --
      The world is made by those who show up for the job.
    5. Re:Do what they do with boats. by maxume · · Score: 1

      I would imagine that the companies who own these things (or the governments who are moving in and cleaning up after irresponsible companies) have weighed the costs (especially time and fuel) and decided to do the cheapest thing possible.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  9. I don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe it's because I'm a west coaster who has never been to the gulf- but why only Wind and Solar but not a Wave Energy Generator? Seems to me that would be a natural....

    1. Re:I don't get it by Archon-X · · Score: 1

      Seems it is:

      Wave energy generators will be buoyed nearby with undersea cables to transmit the power.

  10. Re:Super rich rejoice! by khallow · · Score: 1

    Why would things look different? After all, catering to the superwealthy does help get the economy back on whatever feet it needs to get back onto.

  11. Sure any place looks nice. by jellomizer · · Score: 1

    When it is filled with fit Bikini clad women. However the truth is it will be filled with over 50 out of shape Bikini clad women.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    1. Re:Sure any place looks nice. by ArcherB · · Score: 1

      When it is filled with fit Bikini clad women. However the truth is it will be filled with over 50 out of shape Bikini clad women.

      No, the is an ECO resort. That means it will be filled with middle aged, unwashed and unshaven bikini clad hippie chicks. Expect to see lots of armpit hair at best, 70s bush at worst.

      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
    2. Re:Sure any place looks nice. by snspdaarf · · Score: 1

      And camel legs. Don't forget the camel legs.

      --
      Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!
    3. Re:Sure any place looks nice. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      all leg, but no toe.

    4. Re:Sure any place looks nice. by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Not on my secret base! There all going to be hot lesbian bikini clad babes with automatic weapons trained to snap a mans neck in a second.
      They will be order to stop and question anyone wearing a suit, and kill on sight anyone in a Tuxedo.

      You're not stopping me this time Bond.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    5. Re:Sure any place looks nice. by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Nope. these will be filled with middle aged women who always wished they could be a hippie, but instead married money.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  12. Eco-resort?!? by Locke2005 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...an eco-haven that generates all of its power from renewable sources. What about all the fuel used for helicoptering in all the visitors and supplies? Are they planning on running the helicopter off of bio-diesel? Sure, they could use a sailboat to ferry people in and out... but I personally would rather just stay on the sailboat instead of a rusty old oil platform! I'm sorry, but when someone says "eco-vacation", a metal cage in the middle of the ocean is not the first destination that springs to mind. What's the scuba-diving like around an oil platform? This might make a good place to get scuba certified, just on the basis that there is absolutely nothing else to do there.

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    1. Re:Eco-resort?!? by Grishnakh · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sorry, no. Getting Scuba certified at an oil platform isn't going to happen, because (unless I'm mistaken), these are generally located in fairly deep water. Scuba diving beginners get started at the beach, and later use boats to go out a bit, to where it's perhaps 40-50 feet deep. Most generally don't go deeper than 100-150 feet. If you go any deeper than 100 feet, you're probably getting into technical diving, which is where you start messing around with other mixes of gases, and the risk is higher, and of course the water's a lot colder too.

      Additionally, there's the problem of what do you plan to look at while you're down there? If you want to look at pretty fish and coral and stuff like that, you're best off going no deeper than 40 feet, and sticking to beaches, because that's where all the interesting wildlife is. Like life on the surface, most life underwater relies on sunlight, so it's all close to the surface. Of course, there's plenty of life much deeper too, but 1) there's a lot less density of it than, say, a coral reef, and 2) it's generally not as pretty or colorful. It's also so cold down there that if you're diving in a wetsuit, you can't stay down there that long to look at stuff. Now, if you're diving for wrecks, that's a little different, and these can be much deeper. But deep diving requires a lot of skill and experience. And wrecks aren't likely to be located conveniently right next to an oil rig.

      So if you ask me, this oil platform idea is utter idiocy. As you said, there's absolutely nothing to do out there. You're a lot better off just getting on a cruise ship, from where you can see the open ocean for a few days before your next port-of-call where you can get off and go scuba diving on a nice beach with a beautiful coral reef just offshore.

      As for helicopters, large helicopters run on jet fuel (Jet A), which is basically kerosene, not diesel. They also cost $600/hour to fly, at the minimum. It might be possible to make an aircraft turbine engine that runs on diesel (and by extension, biodiesel), since they already have very large turbines that run on diesel, but I seriously don't see any aircraft engine companies going to the effort of engineering a biodiesel turbine for this tiny market. No airport in America has diesel on hand for refueling anyway; they typically have 100LL avgas, for piston engines, and Jet A for turbine engines, and that's about it. So your point about the helicopters is a very good one: these stupid oil platforms will not be "eco-havens" as long as they rely on expensive jet-fuel-guzzling helicopters to fly visitors and supplies in, and that really is the only convenient way to get stuff and people to and from these locations.

    2. Re:Eco-resort?!? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      As far as using "biofuels" on jet engines - it's been done. Remember, JetA is pretty much kerosene which is pretty much diesel.

      As far as scuba diving from a oil rig - you're pretty much correct. Lots of critters like to hang around the pylons so it wouldn't be as boring as just dropping off in the middle of the Gulf, but I can think of lots better places to dive.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    3. Re:Eco-resort?!? by i.r.id10t · · Score: 1

      Actually, the corals, etc. on deeper reefs (70-100ft deep, off West Palm from my personal experience) are quite colorful. However, color is filtered out based on depth. First to go is true red, happens near the surface. Then true orange, yellow, etc. until you get down to about 70 feet, after that you really just have various shades of blue. Until you go night diving and take a light source with you, at which point its all pretty colors again.

      For a certification dive I'd be more worried about currents than depth off an oil rig, esp. after all the pool time and very first dives in springs and such.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    4. Re:Eco-resort?!? by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      And I don't imagine that the snorkeling that they hype is any great shakes, either. Unless the water is very clear there, you might as well snorkel in a swimming pool.

    5. Re:Eco-resort?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, it is quite common to dive around oil rigs (though this is getting harder to do with increased worries about terrorism). Turns out the structure of the rig provides an excellent place for all sorts of sea life to anchor including sponges and corals. All manner of fish are attracted to the structures as well. Depending on where the rig is and what time of year it is, the water can be quite comfortable down to recreational limits (i.e. non-technical diving) of 130' (40m). There is a lot of excellent diving that is not on a beach.

    6. Re:Eco-resort?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bio-Diesel isn't good for the environment since it causes lots of tropical areas to be deforested in order to grow palm oil and/or soybeans.

  13. Deploy the clue stick by R2.0 · · Score: 1

    Where have these clowns been for the last 2 years? Big dollar theme vacations are dead for now - people are happy to have the money to go to the NJ shore.

    I mean, ballooning over the amazon was neat when you could just pull the $10k out of the equity on your McMansion, but now?

    --
    "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
  14. Nice Yacht Parking Lot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I like all the Yachts that get about 1 MPG parked out front of the "Eco Platform"

    I think I see a Man Bear Pig too.

  15. doesn't look green at all by Chryana · · Score: 1

    The only function of this oil platform which looks green is power generation. What about food supplies and waste disposal? The front of the oil rig is lined up with motor boats, which don't look all that green to me. This looks like the perfect vacation for those super rich hippie couples which live in a house with enough floor space for twenty families, with 3 or 4 cars in their entrance, but they're green because they get their power from solar, and their cars are all hybrids. Yep, some kind of green alright.

  16. Audacity by mcrbids · · Score: 1

    Turning an oil rig into a sea-based hotel is proof to the world that if exhert enough resources and energy, you can announce to the world how much resource and energy that you are saving! Was it Hitler who said something like 'The bigger the lie, the more people will believe it'?? Although Mythbusters already proved it, this is further proof that you CAN polish a turd.

    PS: Godwin's law!

    --
    I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
  17. THE ZOMBIE ARMAGEDDON by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This has been my ideal-yet-unrealistic zombie plan for quite some time now...

  18. What sort of Braindead Moron... by georgewilliamherbert · · Score: 1

    Whoever the designer of this was, has no experience with offshore platforms.

    You NEVER put the helicopter platform on the side. It's never in clear air then, you can't safely approach the pad and land. And it was too close to hotel rooms anyways, where they have it, if the pilot goofs he flies the rotor into the rooms.

    1. Re:What sort of Braindead Moron... by snspdaarf · · Score: 1

      Whoever the designer of this was, has no experience with offshore platforms.

      Doesn't look like they have much experience with the ocean, either. Bad news for the people that go there from, oh, June to November, roughly. But, this is more like the concept cars that the automakers used to come up with, back when they had money. Interesting to look at, but completely impractical.

      --
      Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!
    2. Re:What sort of Braindead Moron... by georgewilliamherbert · · Score: 1

      The general concept doesn't totally suck - one could build an offshore hotel on an oil platform, and some of the winning design's components look reasonable to me.

      Rough seas and high winds at times, and the occasional hurricane, aren't impossible to work around at a resort (it's not like parts of Florida, the Caribbean, Mexico etc don't have those problems on land). It's going to need more evacuations and will have an operations impact, but you just have to plan and budget for that. You give people refunds / free future stays / etc if their visit is cancelled due to a storm, etc.

      But you can't build something with a blatant blaring flaw, and letting something with a blatant blaring flaw win a design competition even if it was a neat concept doesn't make sense to me.

  19. Hurricane Insurability? Sovereignty? by Zymergy · · Score: 1

    Not sure if they have calculated the TCO completely?
    If State Farm is completely pulling out of Florida for profitability reasons, what makes the developers thing this thing will be insurable?
    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=State+farm+pulling+out+of+Florida

    It also depends HOW FAR off shore it is and if is out of International Waters?? ...then you have to consider going through Customs, and the fact that there is no Police, Fire, EMS or 911 service, etc... A real Insurance Nightmare. I suppose there will have to be signed "EULA" Disclaimers... (under what jurisdiction?) (Though some might try to make it an Amsterdam on stilts, etc... it is possible the rich stoner crowd is not too worried about insurance.)

    1. Re:Hurricane Insurability? Sovereignty? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When you propose some big project, and the response is "insurance liability OMFG GET ME A WHAAAAMBULAANCE" it just means the responder a) doesn't like the idea and b) can't articulate the real reasons.

      Because if you think about it, the hurricane insurance and sovereignty issues somehow didn't stop the cruise ship industry, or whole island nations that little more than dirt platforms sticking up waiting to be washed clean by the next catagory 4. And those places make money over the long term.

      I would not invest any money in this idea, but if I were forced to chose between investing in two oil-rig renovations, and they were the same in all aspects except one did not buy insurance, I would invest in the one with no insurance.

  20. Oblig Star Wars Ref by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's no rig...

  21. So let me get this straight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They want to turn the oil rigs into resorts....

    Hmmmm Then the people who complain the loudest about their construction will be the only ones who can afford to vacation there... Oh and of course they will...

  22. No. Loli. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I want an oil rig full of loli.

    Florida is where all the grandmas in bikinis are at.

  23. Its kinda funny... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You RTF article, and it says that it is reclaiming sites once used for dirty energy.

    Take a hard look at the pictures though. Seriously. Helicopters and boats? Are they all running on tidal/wind/solar/nuclear power?

    Don't get me wrong, the idea is excellent. But to go and slam "dirty" oil without an alternative way to get to these luxurious resorts seems paradoxical and rather hypocritical.

  24. Eco-What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is nothing "green" or "eco-friendly" about conspicuous consumption.

  25. what about the walmarts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wait... can we do the same with all those abandoned Walmart buildings left in favor for the Super variety?

  26. Sea Venture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Less ambitious oil rig conversions near shore already exist. Sea Venture in Malaysia for instance.

    http://www.seaventuresdive.com/about.html

  27. Re:Super rich rejoice! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you don't cater to the super-rich, then on what do they spend their money?

  28. Re:hey i've got a use for old oil rigs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    LOL! Straight to the point... I like this one.

  29. jack by eugenpatrik · · Score: 1

    look about pen gppd article.... good_pen

  30. UNCLOS III by Garrett+Fox · · Score: 1

    You might be surprised about the party-line thing. I heard about the UN Law of the Sea Treaty (v3) from John Norton Moore, one of the people who negotiated it. According to him, UNCLOS III had the support of most of the Senate, Bush, and a coalition of scientific, industrial and environmental groups, with only conspiracy theorists having any objection to it. Never mind the still-odious seabed mining provisions, which basically grant ownership of the world's ocean metal/fossil fuel deposits to the UN! Moore described the treaty being held up, as of a few years ago, in committee.

    It should be interesting to see whether the treaty is ratified in this new administration. One point to consider for its fate is Moore's argument that Iran, also not a party to the treaty, could continue to threaten the Strait of Hormuz. We're also seeing the attempt to use UNCLOS' provisions about continental ridges used to justify territorial claims in the Arctic Ocean.

    Incidentally, I would be strongly in support of allowing legal recognition of such "seasteading" plans. However, the best chance for legal independence is to go at least 200 nautical miles offshore, outside the UNCLOS' "exclusive economic zone."

    --
    Revive the Constitution.
  31. It probably can by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know that the oil rigs themselves are designed to withstand hurricanes. That is an essential part of the design. When is the last time you heard of a major oil spill caused by an offshore rig? (It may have happened at some point, probably, but you don't hear about it often).

    Now the question might be if the *resort* which is built into the rig is hurricane-proof. I would imagine anyone going into this business would do the necessary engineering to make it hurricane proof as well.

    They would still probably evacuate guests (and hopefully staff) if there were any hurricane warnings, but there is no saying that such an oil rig resort would have a lot of guests and staff. Your post seems to presume that total 'population' of the resort would be over 100 people. Maybe the resorts are being planned to be very exclusive, with total population being kept below 100 people.

    I don't know much about helicopters, but I do know there are some large helicopters, so I would guess that there exist helicopters that could transport maybe 20 or 30 people at a time. If the population of the rig is below 100 people, it might only take 2 to 5 helicopters to evacuate. That's not much of a problem.

    Or, you could always use a ship to evacuate the platforms. Or maybe the resort keeps a few high-speed, short range boats (but with enough range to reach the nearest coast which might be 100 or 200 miles away) docked at the rigs for such a contingency.

    I went on a cruise a year or two ago, and the 'life boats' they are using nowadays are covered, heated, fairly comfortable, can fit about 30 people IIRC, and could move pretty fast. They were more like small ferries than the lifeboats of bygone days. The cruise ships even use them as ferries to take guests ashore at ports-of-call where there is no suitable pier for the ships to dock at. I was ferried ashore a couple times in one of them, and I would estimate they moved at somewhere in the neighborhood of 30 or 40 miles/hour (I'm not sure what that is in knots), and I'm not sure we ever actually moved at the top speed the vessel is capable of - they might have kept the ferries moving slower so as to give passengers a more comfortable ride (a boat moving fast over waves can be a fairly uncomfortable experience, particularly if people get motion sickness). That's fast enough to get you to a nearby coast in a few hours time, well in advance of an approaching hurricane (as long as you evacuate a day or two before the hurricane approaches).

  32. Mexico != stable/cooperative forever. by Behrooz · · Score: 1

    Nor, with the active presence of the US Coast Guard and a stable, cooperative Mexico, will pirates be a serious problem in the Gulf of Mexico.

    A stable, cooperative Mexico is no longer a really safe bet. When narcotrafficking gangs are seriously challenging the legitimacy/stability of the government over a significant part of a country's territory, all bets are off.

    --
    "We have to go forth and crush every world view that doesn't believe in tolerance and free speech." - David Brin
  33. Yeah, cause there aren't enough resorts! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OMG all our existing resorts are full! We need more!

    Not. Has the person behind this idea been paying attention to the economy that has tanked, bringing tourism down with it? So let's spend millions converting recoverable metals and machinery into a useless, unwanted metal hotel in the middle of the Gulf that no one will ever visit, because they have no money, or if they do, umm, the Gulf is surrounded by popular tourist traps already... Florida, Belize, Costa Rica, SoCal, the Bahamas, the Caribbean... all within a couple hundred miles of Gulf waters...