First chance to read through since the thread went wrong. Alf like many, including myself is looking for reliable souls to get us out of this jam. I came here and as a petro-chem novice could not understand why you did not put a cap on the top of the BOP and close it in. I educated myself and the findings of those versed in the technology was that the casing integrity was lost and a cap on the BOP/new BOP would mean that oil/gas leaked subseafloor and that was then even harder to control. At least with it squirting out of the BOP you can catch most of it. We looked forward. The technology of the bottom kill appears well thought out, has been used many times before and not like the “gaffer-tape”, “make it up each day as we go along”, technology of ROV’s trying to undo nuts on the sea-floor.
I made an earlier post that:
on 1 day Kent Wells told us the diamond cutter was the tool of choice for cutting the riser off near the joint and the super shear was not suitable for this application.
On the next day, after the diamond cutter failed, the super shears were put into action and the consequent twisting and deformation of the flange has caused all sorts of consequent problems.
The conclusion was that the contradiction of the assertion on day 1 and the reality of actions on day 2, were not commensurate with a well thought out plan. Kent is put forward as the senior technical guy of BP. Throughout my whole working life in engineering, albeit not the petro-chemical industry, technically competent people are reserved and careful about what they commit to, on the basis that they know better than anyone else that they are responsible for execution and are familiar with all the pitfalls to that execution. I was shocked because, in my modest book, saying one thing one day and doing something completely different the next, smacks of a marketing man masquerading in technical guise and every time I have come across that little combination, in my life, disaster lurks somewhere not far ahead.
Kent clearly stated in an earlier briefing that all attempts at stopping the flow of oil/gas, based on control at the sea-floor, were off. He stated clearly that bottom -kill was the only way of stopping the flow of oil/gas and that from this moment on sea-floor activity was wholly related to collecting as much of the leaking oil/gas as possible.
I have just listened to his latest video 10th July. Make your mind up Kent. If now, several months in, you are not sure as to whether the casing retains integrity, and possibly it does and it can be shut in with a new BOP stack then, what they h**l were you messing about for during the last XXX days? Virtually every forum out there had somebody saying “stick a new BOP on top”. You told us “no”. I am now scared. Would anyone let an industry that cannot determine some pretty basic facts and make sensible decisions as a consequence, be responsible when the consequences of failure are so horrific ? Would they be allowed to run a nuclear plant or run an airline, like this ?
I have confidence that BP are doing all that anyone could do right now and have been doing for several weeks. What I don’t have, is any confidence that this industry goes about what it does with the level of responsibility commensurate with the consequences. A red hot Alcor, or any number of other competent, diligent and professional individuals, whose heartfelt comments I read here, on the guages every day, every second of every day, making sure that there is no blow out on their rig, is great for that rig, it is not a solution. Somewhere, there will be an idiot that is not awake, not watching. The risk of failure is too close. The capability to interrogate the mode of failure (as we see here - is the casing integrity compromised ?) and take action as a consequence (stick more gaffer tape on the spanner) is not up to the task.
Kent - I am not impressed and again, the gulf between technology applied to extraction and technology applied to dealing with failure, is shown as being huge and incompatible with the nature of the task…