Did BP cause a blowout by putting together a shoddy well plan? No!
Did the BP Co Man not recognise a flowing well during the negative test? Yes, he failed to recognise the failure.
Do TO senior personnel have a duty to monitor and verify the negative test? Absolutely,
Do Senior drilling contractors have a responsibility to understand and verify all the steps taken in the wellbore construction are acceptable to them on their vessel? 100% absolutely.
Is the driller expected to understand all action that takes place on the drill floor regarding starting mud pumps, checking volumes, observing pressure? It’s absolutely 100% required.
Do operations stop if the driller or attending Toolpusher don’t understand what’s happening? Yes.
Who stops the action? The driller or TP or anyone else who feels unsure of the job.
If the Operator says it’s ok to continue do you continue without your own verification? When collective agreement is ascertained, the operation continues.
Do you displace without any consideration for volume or pressure? Never. Never.
Are you able to close in a flowing well? Absolutely.
How do you recognise if it’s flowing? Volume and pressure control.
In the absence of vol and press control how do you recognise a flowing well?..Eh! The logger…Eh! Um!..Aghhh!
Did BP tell you to ignore volume control? ???
And, did you listen to BP or follow your procedures? ???
Are BP onshore responsible for failing to observe for volume control? ???
Are TO onshore responsible for volume control? ???
Did either TO or BP tell you to ignore volume control? ???
Do MMS control volumes and pressure? ???
Does the logger have a major input in observing the well’s volumes?
If the logger and driller had been watching volumes and pressure would they have been able to detect hydrocarbons entering the well? Absolutely, Yes!
Would there have been a blowout if they had managed to shut the well in after 100, 200, 300 0r 400 Bbls had entered the well? Absolutely.
Would this have been a major well control situation? Yes.
Would there have been a blowout? No.
If a pre-job meeting had adequately described the displacement and the functions of all the individuals in the team would there have been a blowout? No.
If the logger had observed pressure fluctuations would he have informed the driller? I’d like to think so.
Is there another example of a drilling crew failing to shut the well in after taking a 1000 Bbl influx? No.
According to standards in the industry at the time of the displacement on the Macondo was there any requirement by Gov’t, BP or TO to control volumes and observe pressure for anomaly indication? ??? This is a good question for all the lawyers.
After a barrier has been proven intact is there any requirement for volume control…in the GOM? ???
The list goes on. It’s the questions we ask that are vital. One thing for sure is that responsibilities are well defined in the industry, and though people lost their lives in this terrible accident, we have a responsibility to those still working in it. Therefore, some of you won’t like my style because it doesn’t sympathise enough with they who perished. Believe me, I sympathise, but if I can help, in some small way, to get a truth that the offshore drilling industry understands and which make our operations and responsibilities better defined then I’m happy to question all events of that night. Hopefully, I don’t upset folk with my pursuit of fact over fiction!
One big concern is the displacement at 8300 feet. It could have been done at 5500 feet. But, the purpose of the test was to verify the cement barrier. The only criteria for success would have been ‘0’ pressure on the guages and no flow from the Kill line. Remember, everyone on the drill floor were uncomfortable with the results, and the tests were repeated. And, for some reason, they all agreed that the test had passed. This is a critical point. But, no blowout has occurred.
Taking into account that they had spent hours over a test which usually passes in 45 mins, we need to seriously question their collective judgement. They came up with explanations which are not known to others in the drilling industry. They, collectively made a very big mistake. But, there’s no blowout.
So how should they have proceeded? And who was going to give the crews guidance on the displacement, which had been delayed (often happens). Do we know if BP authorised ignoring volumes and pressure. I can’t believe that’s possible. Nevertheless, TO should have followed their own procedures where well volumes are ALWAYS controlled and monitored. You never know when one of your barriers fails.
I don’t think it’s a good idea for TO to continue with their line of blaming BP exclusively. Other Operators and Contractors will be alarmed by their stance and it could affect their ability to secure future contracts. Either they accept their failure to monitor volumes was the biggest issue in the blowout or they learn nothing whatsoever, in the interests of saving their reputation. They will receive much criticism for rejecting any blame.