Just a quick point on the acoustic BOP activation mentioned above, this would have done nothing and there are several other failsafe BOP activation systems in place as effective if not more so than the acoustic method. The BOP design requires continual communications with the surface for the BOP to stay open. If surface communications lines are lost, shuttle valves move, a subseea pressure accumulator applies pressure to the shear and blind rams and the well bore is supposed to be isolated.
It appears the shear rams could not close, regardless of the activation method, an ROV (Remote Operated Vehicle) was used to try what is known as a hot stab activation. If that didn’t work no manner of acoustic systems would have done anything. The fault more than likely lies in the BOP rather than the failsafe methods to activate.
As to why the BOP failed to close - several theories abound, either there is something across the rams (they only cut the body of the drill pipe not the tool joints), mechanical fault not detected during regular testing in the BOP or the BOP accumulator pressure had dropped after repeated activations of the annular preventer.
(just another ex drilling engineer/rig engineer chiming in)
On the cementing - the cement in the annulus around the 7in liner may have been lightened , deep water wells have pretty marginal pore pressure and fracture pressure margins, so all sorts of wacky cement formulations are used.
There are also discussion that the liner top seal assembly did not seal or test. Balanced cement plugs (basically filled the inside of the hole up with cement as a seal in several locations) were run above the liner top. They were displacing the drilling fluid (which is heavier than water ) to sea water at the time.
I suspect they did not wait to pressure test the cement plugs adequately and the lowering of hydrostatic head cause the well control event. Failure to monitor adequately the hole volumes (plus the difficulty of monitoring influx in deep water) lead to a kick. Failure of the BOP stack to operate lead to a blowout.
just my tuppence
I would but I’m out of time. Would you believe some guy started three threads on the same topic–all in the same forum? Here’s what I’ll do: I’ll report this thread to **Miller and see if he has time for you.
**
Gfactor
Slacker Moderator
Interesting interview with someone who came off the rig. It was passed onto me by someone in the industry, so regardless of Levins political persuasions the guy on the other end of the phone knows what he is talking about.
A couple of comments for persons who listen to the tape:
The caller’s apparent mention that one of the BOPs (known as the annular) was closed for part of the time prior to the blowout is highly significant. With the annular closed while the slug of formation fluid was migrating toward the wellhead, the fluid could not expand; this would be bring bottomhole pressure toward surface, and, when the annular was opened, could cause the violent and sudden expansion described by the caller.
The operation described by the caller, displacing the riser to seawater, would have been one of the the last acts before finishing operations at the site and temporarily abandoning the well. Up until this operation, the riser would have been filled with an oil-based drilling fluid. The drilling fluid is recovered into tanks at surface for later re-use; once the riser has been filled with seawater, it can be unlatched from the wellhead and withdrawn to surface. As another poster has said, the seawater is normally lower-density than the drilling mud; this displacement would have reduced the hydrostatic head in the riser, contributing to the violence of the kick.
What is not adding up is that the Halliburton statement released says
“At the time of the incident, well operations had not yet reached the point requiring the placement of the final cement plug which would
enable the planned temporary abandonment of the well, consistent with normal oilfield practice.”
so HAL say the last cement plug was not pumped, so why were they displacing and preparing to unlatch.
Stories are not tying up - although 1/2 the information is probably rumour so that would explain a lot.
Where they do agree is the liner cementing was completed and tested correctly.
The information on the liner seal assembly not setting/sealing is probably incorrect
If the seal assembly had be set and was functioning then either the float shoe failed or the casing itself failed. Prior to swapping over to seawater a casing integrity test should have been run which could not have been passed if there were any exits from the wellbore. It is possible that they were starting early by using seawater to clean the liner top prior to running the seals which would be consistant with all accounts.
But until BP opens up officially this is all speculation.
Must be. Exxon spent money on the Prince William Sound cleanup, but when it was apparent that it could go on for literally years, they walked away. And those folks who make their living from sea harvest can forget about lawsuits. Unless they don’t mind waiting until their grandchildren are grown. Exxon stalled, delayed, obfuscated, appealed, squealed and weaseled their way out of settling the suits from Valdez fishermen until many were dead and most were old and gray. Huge profits plus an army of lawyers means no justice for the little guy.
Can Florida, Mississippi and Alabama sue BP and the State of Louisiana to recover the billions and billions that this is going to cost us?
I guess the silver lining is that images of oil drenched coast lines and dying sea life super imposed over Sarah Palin and Michael Steele chanting “Drill, baby, drill” may be the final nail in the Republican coffin nee platform.
The deepwater wells are out in federal waters not Louisiana state waters (3 mile limit for state waters) so not sure why you would sue Louisiana, other than , well why not.
In Florida there has always been discussion about legislation to allow these wells. If the state doesn’t control it, then who does? Does the Federal government issue oil drilling permits? What kept Bush and his buddies from drilling Florida oil all of those years?
There are those who darkly suspect it has to do with how much Florida owned GW’s ass. I’m not saying that, mind, as I have no proof. But just reporting that some people darkly suspect that.
The government sells drilling rights for areas. The oil companies buy them up ,but do not necessarily drill them. They like to have them on the books as an asset. If you gave them right to drill the whole country they would probably not drill any of it. They have rights to millions of acres now. They just drill when they need to. They have no incentive to drill for a bigger surplus.
There may be some of you who aren’t all that familiar with the beaches along the Gulf. I think they have to be among some of the most beautiful in the world. The sand is unusually white.
In October or November, my college roommate and I have been going down to Gulf Shores. We’ve found a place away from the main drag by about seven miles. Most days we have the beach virtually to ourselves and the birds. I may have left a few shells behind, but I’ve been secretly bringing back the beach to use in the “mermaid houses” that I make. I just haven’t gotten around to making any more houses recently, so the sand is in a heavy beach bag. I guess I am the Keeper of the White Silver Sands.
My very old roommate is a photographer and has thousands of photographs of this incredibly beautiful place. One of them is the first thing I look at every morning. It’s of a sandpiper in early light, walking in the shallows. I just don’t know if I can bear to look at him for a while.
I am so full of tears, but I can’t turn them loose.
As someone else pointed out, offshore areas greater than 3 miles from the coast (9 miles for Florida) are administered by the federal government through the Minerals Management Service (MMS). MMS offers offshore tracts through periodic lease sales, with undrilled leases reverting back to MMS after a defined period. The eastern Gulf of Mexico is a special case, with most (but not all) exploration activities banned by congressional legislation since the early '80s. The ban also extends to all, or nearly all, of the Atlantic and Pacific coasts.
I was pretty hazy myself on why the eastern Gulf has been generally off-limits to drilling, but found this Energy Information Administration article online that explains some of the background to the drilling moratorium.
According to the article, the drilling ban off Florida pre-dates Shrub’s administration by many years, was a Congressional action, and in fact a supporting order by the executive was signed by Bush 41 in 1990. So, er, no, not exactly.
Shrub’s administration lifted the executive ban on drilling in the Eastern Gulf in 2008 (I’m sure that surprises no one) and the congressional ban was allowed to expire around the same time, but legislation passed in 2006 maintains a ban on drilling within 125 miles of the Florida coast, until at least 2022. Now, as to why Florida continues to get all these special considerations, well, I wouldn’t know.
Florida’s economy is tourism based. A lot of that is Disney, but before Disney and in addition to Disney many, many tourists come to Florida for the white sandy beaches (Gulf Coast, only, East Coast of Florida has lousy sand). Beyond that, it’s the same as the rest of the Gulf Coast. Except Florida has 27 Electoral Votes, as opposed to only 9 for Louisiana and Alabama and 6 for Mississippi. Texas has 34 but is not really in play, plus as I understand it the beaches there aren’t that nice, and tourism is nowhere as a big a factor in their economy.
Tourism is said to have an impact of about $60 billion / annum out of a GDP of around 500 billion. Florida has 2,276 miles of coast, of which just over 25% (633 miles) are beaches.
Net, the economic impact of an oil spill for us will be measured in billions and billions of dollars per year. BP’s profits last year were 26 billion, down from previous years.
The well was first reported as leaking 1,000 barrels a day, then maybe 5,000 barrels a day.
Now there is suspicion that 5,000 barrels a day is too low.
The Governor of Alabama is planning for a worst-case scenario that 150,000 barrels a day are being spilled, a number also suggested by a Florida State University oceanography professor and some other people.
I really hope that is a wild overestimate, but with no way to stop the leakage now whatever the number, I think the damage to the eastern coastline of the US will be substantial and long lasting.
Here’s what I’ll do: I’ll report this thread to **Miller and see if he has time for you.