I really think you are missing the point of what they are trying to do. the cap referred to is the containment box or a different design (smaller). You can't just shove a cork in it. Thats why another proposal is to drill a second well to inject concrete into the first to plug it. That may take several months.
>
A new attempt to cap one of the oil leaks in the Gulf Coast will take at least another day to execute. The 100-ton containment box is currently sitting 200 feet away from the leaking pipe on the ocean floor, but ice crystals are blocking the opening that would allow the oil to flow up to a tanker on the surface>
>>If it was that easy to cap they would. BP are losing billions over this. Set that against the cost of drilling a new well if this one was capped. here's no comparison.
>>
>>>If they were really concerned about sealing it it off to protect the environment, they would have done that long ago. Their attempts appear to basically be to seal it while still allowing for oil to continue to flow into another rig or container ships so as not to lose too much $. Sad...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Russians suggest using an underground nuke to seal off the well:
http://trueslant.com/juliaioffe/2010/05/04/nuke-that-slick/>>>>
>>>>They used it 5 times to deal with what they call "petrocalamities". It's interesting that they've developed a rather apt term for the problem...
>>>>
>>>>It seems that hydrocarbon exploration in the Soviet Union/Russia is, ahem, "interesting":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wF8tZjKTfEE
