Deepwater Horizon - Transocean Oil Rig Fire

Offshore
4081

[QUOTE=New Orleans Lady;38136]So the Department of Energy and Congress have committed to development of the deepwater Gulf oil reserves in the name of national security. This also helps explain why Obama has been pro-drilling in the Gulf.

Indeed, BP supplies most of the oil and gas to the U.S. military. That might help to explain why Obama is talking tough but going easy on BP.

But let’s take a step back and ask why the government considers oil a national security priority in the first place.

Well, as professor of national security affairs at the Naval War College Mackubin T. Owens writes:

The concern of these lawmakers [regarding the BP oil spill] is understandable, but lest they overreact, they need to place their valid concerns within the broader context of the nation’s economic health and energy security.

Americans currently consume about 22 million barrels of oil daily, of which about two-thirds is imported. The Department of Energy’s Energy Information Administration (EIA) expects imports to reach 70% by 2025. This means we send billions of dollars abroad in payment for foreign oil. This makes little sense when, according to the U.S. Minerals Management Service (MMS), there are vast reserves of oil and gas beneath Federal lands and coastal waters. And it is likely that even these estimates are low. For instance, in 1987, MMS estimated that there were 9 billion barrels of oil in the Gulf of Mexico. By 2007, once drilling had begun in deeper waters, MMS had revised its estimate upward to 45 billion.

In addition, the U.S. military is the largest consumer of oil in the world. And the government is eager to ensure that the military maintains access to oil[/QUOTE]

Does all the oil BP, Exxon, et al. extract from the Gulf of Mexico go to the USA? No. The oil they pump belongs to them, after paying a royalty, and they sell it on the open market to anyone in the world.
Oil is a worldwide commodity and every ounce of oil BP or any other company pumps out of the GOM becomes “foreign supplied” as soon as it come out of the ground because they bought it, they give the US citizens a cut of the proceeds in the form of a royalty[tax] on what they say they pumped but they can the sell the stuff anywhere they want. The line of thought of “national security, less dependence on foreign oil” is something dreamed up by some really smart PR people who sold it to the their employees in the US Congress who then sold it to the American public.
These guys learned a long time ago that if you use a few key words and phrases like “national security”, “foreign”, “energy independence” or “US Military” they can get away with pretty much anything.

4082

Someone here awhile ago linked to a video interview with the directional driller for the relief well, I think he looked confident when he stated he had drilled four relief wells and hadn’t missed yet. (knock on wood)

still broadly mulling it over……
ie, none of the GoM operators have a viable worst case scenario plan: across the board, this type of frantic race for new discoveries, especially domestic, reference geopolitical reality and nat’l security, allowed drllg tech to outpace blow out response tech.

ie , across the board, drilling the HP/HT GoM, especially wildcats but any well, unanticipated situation leading to loss of well control cannot be 100% ruled out using current equipment and practices. In the papers and journals I’ve read, BP seems to have emphasized R&D for cutting edge technology as they strived to be leaders in the race for new discoveries in more challenging environments. R&D is expensive. The BP corporate mindset of leading the race on the cutting edge (Hayward is a geologist not a drilling contractor) also contributed to them losing touch with the rig safety basics and left them most vulnerable to a catastrophic event. Some major operators benefit from this R&D and also concentrate on being their own drilling contractors but a blow out somewhere from someone was just a matter of time.

ie, GoM environment cannot be 100% guaranteed protected while drilling continues with current scenario. Since according to Bloomberg reports all major GoM operators have fairly similar profit margins, note that ExxonMobil uses their profit to buy back shares to increase shareholder value, whereas BP used their profit as dividends to shareholders, I suspect if we could scrutinize all operator’s internal memos and emails this closely we’d find that all operators cut some corners to reduce cost. Who can say they’ve always used all the centralizers Halliburton has suggested?

We need a level playing field mandating rules for all management re: safe procedures. We need to have a two check system of procedural ok and also safety ok.

Thoughts: To give the floor hands acceptable risk and a fighting chance, we need to put pressure sensors and pressure relief mechanisms at the well head. We need turbines in the SSBOP to guarantee sustained battery charge as long as there is flow. We need a high pressure riser with staged pressure sensors and pressure reliefs and a back up SBOP.

If these changes cost $100M per rig, prorated over ten years that is $27K per day. If a well takes 6 months that would be 5M add’l, if the reservoir is 100 million barrels that is an additional .05 / brl finding cost. Would operators be willing to pay that in light of $100B potential liability?

4083

[QUOTE=Anchor Guy;38139]Sounds like the sentence for each person found guilty is times 11 isn’t it?[/QUOTE]

Maybe it is up to the judge:

Federal Sentencing
The statutory sentence for involuntary manslaughter at the federal level only relates to an act committed on a vessel on the high seas, or on a U.S. territory, pursuant to the special federal jurisdiction in these instances. The prison sentence in any of these situations is not to exceed six years. The federal sentencing guidelines, however, are more specific on manslaughter. The base sentence is 12 months unless the crime was committed through an act of reckless conduct, in which case the recommended sentence is 18 months, or with a car or other vehicle, in which case the appropriate sentences is 22 months. If more than one person was killed as a result of the same general act, each death carries its own sentence, as just described, and they can be ordered to be served concurrently (one at a time). The judge, however, is not bound by these figures in the guidelines.

The real question is who are you going to charge. Anyone who was following orders in the maritime environment is not guilty. Are you going to charge the master of the vessel? Are you going to charge the president of the actual corporation who chartered DWH?

Here is what you would have to prove to convict one or more of the leaders:

A person engages in conduct “recklessly” if the person engages in the conduct in conscious and clearly unjustifiable disregard of a substantial likelihood of the existence of the relevant facts or risks, such disregard involving a gross deviation from acceptable standards of conduct.

A person engages in conduct “negligently” if the person engages in the conduct in unreasonable disregard of a substantial likelihood of the existence of relevant facts or risks, a disregard involving a gross deviation from acceptable standards of conduct.

With 125 people on that rig if the actions were so far of the standard practice why did no one stop the work. Did anyone pick up a phone and call the CG or one of the headquarters to “blow the whistle”. There were executives on the that rig talking to most of the staff when the accident happened!

4084

We must also consider today and at least for the next decade there are more blocks ready to drill offshore than there are deep sea rigs to drill them. The rigs are put in service over the reservoir where the investors thinks they can earn the greatest return at the lowest risk. If we raise the safety bar too high or make the penalties for violations too great the rigs will go elsewhere. How would you life or neighborer change without GOM drilling? Once those rigs leave they will never come back. Building new rigs will take a decade or more if you can find anyone willing to make the investment for the new US safety requirements.

How many US flagged super takers are there in operation today?

[QUOTE=pumpjack hand;38145]Someone here awhile ago linked to a video interview with the directional driller for the relief well, I think he looked confident when he stated he had drilled four relief wells and hadn’t missed yet. (knock on wood)

still broadly mulling it over……
ie, none of the GoM operators have a viable worst case scenario plan: across the board, this type of frantic race for new discoveries, especially domestic, reference geopolitical reality and nat’l security, allowed drllg tech to outpace blow out response tech.

ie , across the board, drilling the HP/HT GoM, especially wildcats but any well, unanticipated situation leading to loss of well control cannot be 100% ruled out using current equipment and practices. In the papers and journals I’ve read, BP seems to have emphasized R&D for cutting edge technology as they strived to be leaders in the race for new discoveries in more challenging environments. R&D is expensive. The BP corporate mindset of leading the race on the cutting edge (Hayward is a geologist not a drilling contractor) also contributed to them losing touch with the rig safety basics and left them most vulnerable to a catastrophic event. Some major operators benefit from this R&D and also concentrate on being their own drilling contractors but a blow out somewhere from someone was just a matter of time.

ie, GoM environment cannot be 100% guaranteed protected while drilling continues with current scenario. Since according to Bloomberg reports all major GoM operators have fairly similar profit margins, note that ExxonMobil uses their profit to buy back shares to increase shareholder value, whereas BP used their profit as dividends to shareholders, I suspect if we could scrutinize all operator’s internal memos and emails this closely we’d find that all operators cut some corners to reduce cost. Who can say they’ve always used all the centralizers Halliburton has suggested?

We need a level playing field mandating rules for all management re: safe procedures. We need to have a two check system of procedural ok and also safety ok.

Thoughts: To give the floor hands acceptable risk and a fighting chance, we need to put pressure sensors and pressure relief mechanisms at the well head. We need turbines in the SSBOP to guarantee sustained battery charge as long as there is flow. We need a high pressure riser with staged pressure sensors and pressure reliefs and a back up SBOP.

If these changes cost $100M per rig, prorated over ten years that is $27K per day. If a well takes 6 months that would be 5M add’l, if the reservoir is 100 million barrels that is an additional .05 / brl finding cost. Would operators be willing to pay that in light of $100B potential liability?[/QUOTE]

4085

[QUOTE=dell;38133]As well they shouldn’t be: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/06/25/96591/is-it-time-to-consider-barring.html[/QUOTE]

Thanks Dell for this article. There is no plainer picture of a pattern of corporate criminal negligence. They will continue on this track without us putting them out of their misery.

4086

[QUOTE=company man 1;38116]At what depth do you anticipate them attemting the intersect? Have you seen the logs & the pore pressures? How do you anticipate them over coming the loss circulation zones & keeping this thing from flowing? Are you concerned with the well head/ BOPs leaning the way they are? Will they have ot run casing to the intersect point? Are they having to plug & set a whipstock each time they miss the intersect point?[/QUOTE]

HPHT wells are harder to kill than any other. I’m interested in what the pump rates have to be to kill the well. The well is producing approx 30 to 40,000 Bbls per day. Let’s assume 40,000.
That is 27.7 Bbls/min of flow.
I have no idea of what the mud pump flow will be. Let’s assume they can manage a pump rate of 27.7 Bbls/min.
As we introduce weighted mud into the flowing volume the backpressure on the reservoir increases thereby reducing the flowrate. We continue pumping for days or weeks until we achieve a fluid column of mud capable of withstanding the current blowout force of the reservoir. We hope to achieve an overbalance on the reservoir, but must be considerate of the weaker formation above the Reservoir. If it breaks down we will incur losses to the weak zone. This could actually help us as long as the weak zone losses eventually cure. I’ll see if I can get some data on other relief wells.
The eventual goal is to fill the well from Reservoir to WH with weighted mud. Considering the MW to control the well was 14 ppg, we are going to need more initially. If the rig receiving return flow can remain latched on we might even get away with 14 ppg. But, I believe they’ll go for more weight.

4087

[QUOTE=rlanasa;38147]We must also consider today and at least for the next decade there are more blocks ready to drill offshore than there are deep sea rigs to drill them. The rigs are put in service over the reservoir where the investors thinks they can earn the greatest return at the lowest risk. If we raise the safety bar too high or make the penalties for violations too great the rigs will go elsewhere. How would you life or neighborer change without GOM drilling? Once those rigs leave they will never come back. Building new rigs will take a decade or more if you can find anyone willing to make the investment for the new US safety requirements.

How many US flagged super takers are there in operation today?[/QUOTE]
Penalties for violations which cause the kind of damge that has been caused by premeditated negligence can’t be great enough. If we have to allow outlaws destroy our environment, put thousands out of work, destroy 1/3 of America’s seafood sources, & destroy our propety values, to give us the energy we need then we don’t need it. You may want to rephrase your statement considering this disaster was totally avoidable & BP did everything to cause it.

4088

[QUOTE=rlanasa;38146]Maybe it is up to the judge:

Federal Sentencing
The statutory sentence for involuntary manslaughter at the federal level only relates to an act committed on a vessel on the high seas, or on a U.S. territory, pursuant to the special federal jurisdiction in these instances. The prison sentence in any of these situations is not to exceed six years. The federal sentencing guidelines, however, are more specific on manslaughter. The base sentence is 12 months unless the crime was committed through an act of reckless conduct, in which case the recommended sentence is 18 months, or with a car or other vehicle, in which case the appropriate sentences is 22 months. If more than one person was killed as a result of the same general act, each death carries its own sentence, as just described, and they can be ordered to be served concurrently (one at a time). The judge, however, is not bound by these figures in the guidelines.

The real question is who are you going to charge. Anyone who was following orders in the maritime environment is not guilty. Are you going to charge the master of the vessel? Are you going to charge the president of the actual corporation who chartered DWH?

Here is what you would have to prove to convict one or more of the leaders:

A person engages in conduct “recklessly” if the person engages in the conduct in conscious and clearly unjustifiable disregard of a substantial likelihood of the existence of the relevant facts or risks, such disregard involving a gross deviation from acceptable standards of conduct.

A person engages in conduct “negligently” if the person engages in the conduct in unreasonable disregard of a substantial likelihood of the existence of relevant facts or risks, a disregard involving a gross deviation from acceptable standards of conduct.

With 125 people on that rig if the actions were so far of the standard practice why did no one stop the work. Did anyone pick up a phone and call the CG or one of the headquarters to “blow the whistle”. There were executives on the that rig talking to most of the staff when the accident happened![/QUOTE]
Start with the company man & junior engineers plea bargaining for testimony. The work your way up the ladder to Doug Suttles’ lying guilty ass. They’ve got him on lying to government agents & the public about the size of the disaster right now.

4089

Second degree murder convictions are almost never a result of an accident. Second degree murder is closer to firing a gun into a crowd, intentionally dropping a drill pipe or casing onto the floor or boat below. The perpetrator needs to expect he was going to hurt someone but did not expect he was going to kill them.

I cannot imagine a jury deciding anyone on DWH or its chain of command was expecting to or trying to hurt someone.

[QUOTE=Texanne;38124]Second degree murder:
[B][/B]
Second-degree murder is ordinarily defined as 1) an intentional killing that is not premeditated or planned, nor committed in a reasonable “heat of passion” or 2) a killing caused by dangerous conduct and the offender’s obvious lack of concern for human life. Second-degree murder may best be viewed as the middle ground between first-degree murder and voluntary manslaughter

Which still comes under the heading of murder.[/QUOTE]

4090

What would you have the junior engineers plead guilty to as part of a plea bargain?

[QUOTE=company man 1;38153]Start with the company man & junior engineers plea bargaining for testimony. The work your way up the ladder to Doug Suttles’ lying guilty ass. They’ve got him on lying to government agents & the public about the size of the disaster right now.[/QUOTE]

4091

[QUOTE=rlanasa;38147]We must also consider today and at least for the next decade there are more blocks ready to drill offshore than there are deep sea rigs to drill them. The rigs are put in service over the reservoir where the investors thinks they can earn the greatest return at the lowest risk. If we raise the safety bar too high or make the penalties for violations too great the rigs will go elsewhere. How would you life or neighborer change without GOM drilling? Once those rigs leave they will never come back. Building new rigs will take a decade or more if you can find anyone willing to make the investment for the new US safety requirements.

How many US flagged super takers are there in operation today?[/QUOTE]

Most of what you point out is a given. Too much won’t help. Not enough won’t help. What is your point exactly?

4092

[QUOTE=rlanasa;38147]We must also consider today and at least for the next decade there are more blocks ready to drill offshore than there are deep sea rigs to drill them. The rigs are put in service over the reservoir where the investors thinks they can earn the greatest return at the lowest risk. If we raise the safety bar too high or make the penalties for violations too great the rigs will go elsewhere. How would you life or neighborer change without GOM drilling? Once those rigs leave they will never come back. Building new rigs will take a decade or more if you can find anyone willing to make the investment for the new US safety requirements.

How many US flagged super takers are there in operation today?[/QUOTE]

Absolutely correct. There’s nothing wrong with the rigs. Perhaps, more focus on the BOPs and their functionality.
Deepwater, is an issue, a greater threat because of the fact that by the time a BOP is closed you may already have a 1 Bbl influx coming at you up the riser, which becomes 800+ Bbls at surface. But, with the right decision makers in place, deepwater isn’t really that different from conventional shallow water drilling. In the case of the DWH, decisions were made about positive and negative tests which showed either inexperience, or an insane risk taker at the helm. This decision making has to addressed.

4093

[QUOTE=pumpjack hand;38145]Someone here awhile ago linked to a video interview with the directional driller for the relief well, I think he looked confident when he stated he had drilled four relief wells and hadn’t missed yet. (knock on wood)

still broadly mulling it over……
ie, none of the GoM operators have a viable worst case scenario plan: across the board, this type of frantic race for new discoveries, especially domestic, reference geopolitical reality and nat’l security, allowed drllg tech to outpace blow out response tech.

ie , across the board, drilling the HP/HT GoM, especially wildcats but any well, unanticipated situation leading to loss of well control cannot be 100% ruled out using current equipment and practices. In the papers and journals I’ve read, BP seems to have emphasized R&D for cutting edge technology as they strived to be leaders in the race for new discoveries in more challenging environments. R&D is expensive. The BP corporate mindset of leading the race on the cutting edge (Hayward is a geologist not a drilling contractor) also contributed to them losing touch with the rig safety basics and left them most vulnerable to a catastrophic event. Some major operators benefit from this R&D and also concentrate on being their own drilling contractors but a blow out somewhere from someone was just a matter of time.

ie, GoM environment cannot be 100% guaranteed protected while drilling continues with current scenario. Since according to Bloomberg reports all major GoM operators have fairly similar profit margins, note that ExxonMobil uses their profit to buy back shares to increase shareholder value, whereas BP used their profit as dividends to shareholders, I suspect if we could scrutinize all operator’s internal memos and emails this closely we’d find that all operators cut some corners to reduce cost. Who can say they’ve always used all the centralizers Halliburton has suggested?

We need a level playing field mandating rules for all management re: safe procedures. We need to have a two check system of procedural ok and also safety ok.

Thoughts: To give the floor hands acceptable risk and a fighting chance, we need to put pressure sensors and pressure relief mechanisms at the well head. We need turbines in the SSBOP to guarantee sustained battery charge as long as there is flow. We need a high pressure riser with staged pressure sensors and pressure reliefs and a back up SBOP.

If these changes cost $100M per rig, prorated over ten years that is $27K per day. If a well takes 6 months that would be 5M add’l, if the reservoir is 100 million barrels that is an additional .05 / brl finding cost. Would operators be willing to pay that in light of $100B potential liability?[/QUOTE]
With all due respect pumping jack I disagree with some of your statements. If all the other operators wer going at it as carelessly as BP has, don’t you think more would have emerged by now. Sure they all had the same response plan, but the similarities pretty much end right there. Do you have a lick of evidence to back up the claims that the other big companies are corner cutting & buying back stock instead of paying dividends? I guess 80% of the people I know are in the oil/ petrochemical industry & without a doubt BP’s name gets mentioned as much as all the other guys combined by people when safety & environmental issues come up. Are there industry & governmental improvements that should be addressed from this disaster? No doubt there are, but to say there is an industry wide practice of corner cutting to this degree is absolutely false. I have been working almost exclusively in the GOM all my adult life & if I thought for one second the other operators were anywhere near this wreckless & arrogant, I would be looking for other work right now while screaming to the top of my lungs that deep water drilling should never be allowed again. I have good friends who work for Anadarko & they were not allowed to have any say in this project. I can tell you for a first hand fact that they don’t operate this way. Now they stand a chance of going under over this mess, because a well design they approved of as a partner was changed at the eleventh hour & they weren’t even consulted about it.

4094

Astonishing! Alcor’s ego is almost as large as the oil spill. Nothing has been altered. When all the facts are truly known, all the evidence is catalogued and sifted, all the statements taken, all the rumours deleted and gossip quashed, we may know what the cause of this catastrophe was. Lets learn from this and place safety and human lives ahead of the greed and get back to drilling.

4095

[QUOTE=rlanasa;38155]What would you have the junior engineers plead guilty to as part of a plea bargain?[/QUOTE]
There’s about a 4 million plus eleven things I can think of right off hand. I’m not gonna get into symantecs with you about whether BP’s people are guilty of murder Etc. Everyone in America knows they are & the attitude of you, Alcor, & Mr. Smith are proof you probably don’t reside in this country which means you won’t have any say when it comes to what people here think or what we do. Eventually the heat will become great enough that even the asshole politicians on the take will be to scared to stand up for BP in this.

4096

[QUOTE=company man 1;38159]With all due respect pumping jack I disagree with some of your statements. If all the other operators wer going at it as carelessly as BP has, don’t you think more would have emerged by now. Sure they all had the same response plan, but the similarities pretty much end right there. Do you have a lick of evidence to back up the claims that the other big companies are corner cutting & buying back stock instead of paying dividends? I guess 80% of the people I know are in the oil/ petrochemical industry & without a doubt BP’s name gets mentioned as much as all the other guys combined by people when safety & environmental issues come up. Are there industry & governmental improvements that should be addressed from this disaster? No doubt there are, but to say there is an industry wide practice of corner cutting to this degree is absolutely false. I have been working almost exclusively in the GOM all my adult life & if I thought for one second the other operators were anywhere near this wreckless & arrogant, I would be looking for other work right now while screaming to the top of my lungs that deep water drilling should never be allowed again. I have good friends who work for Anadarko & they were not allowed to have any say in this project. I can tell you for a first hand fact that they don’t operate this way. Now they stand a chance of going under over this mess, because a well design they approved of as a partner was changed at the eleventh hour & they weren’t even consulted about it.[/QUOTE]

Not true. This is misguided nonsense. When partners get together it is agreed which one shall perform the operation, all planning and execution. Naturally, the partners would have had an interest in the development of the well. Purely financial. BP was responsible for the execution of the well. This is quite normal throughout the world. The well design was changed and met with MMS approval. The partners had no reason to be alarmed.
Decisions on the rig changed this outlook completely. And, anyone informed in town. When you invest, you take risks. If that involves risk with the drilling contractor, all partners assume the same risk for profit or loss.

4097

One of my exact points is some on the safety reform side want to require redundant BOP’s. Most of the derricks and even rigs operating today cannot support that kind of weight. Those rigs will sail off an operate where there are less or even NO regulations. With them 150,000 high paying american jobs will disappear. Most of us have no idea how many jobs offshore drilling funds in the United States.

[QUOTE=Cynthia;38157]Most of what you point out is a given. Too much won’t help. Not enough won’t help. What is your point exactly?[/QUOTE]

4098

[QUOTE=Trilobyte;38161]Astonishing! Alcor’s ego is almost as large as the oil spill. Nothing has been altered. When all the facts are truly known, all the evidence is catalogued and sifted, all the statements taken, all the rumours deleted and gossip quashed, we may know what the cause of this catastrophe was. Lets learn from this and place safety and human lives ahead of the greed and get back to drilling.[/QUOTE]

100% correct. DWH, passed all the requirements for a modern rig to operate with exceptional drilling and safety records. But, the OIM didn’t stand up to the company man when he knew the risks were high. We can have all the new equipment that the rig designers can throw at us, but it doesn’t change the poor decisions which resulted in the DWH demise. If you’re led by a fool, and accept it, then you are also a fool. If this is arrogance, then I accept that I know my subject.

4099

Get out your dictionary NO ONE on that rig is guilty of murder. For someone to be guilty of murder you would have to show someone was trying to or at least new they were going to hurt someone. e.g. You would have to show something akin to a manager throwing workers overboard for working to slowly or questioning their orders.

[QUOTE=company man 1;38163]There’s about a 4 million plus eleven things I can think of right off hand. I’m not gonna get into symantecs with you about whether BP’s people are guilty of murder Etc. Everyone in America knows they are & the attitude of you, Alcor, & Mr. Smith are proof you probably don’t reside in this country which means you won’t have any say when it comes to what people here think or what we do. Eventually the heat will become great enough that even the asshole politicians on the take will be to scared to stand up for BP in this.[/QUOTE]

4100

[QUOTE=rlanasa;38165]One of my exact points is some on the safety reform side want to require redundant BOP’s. Most of the derricks and even rigs operating today cannot support that kind of weight. Those rigs will sail off an operate where there are less or even NO regulations. With them 150,000 high paying american jobs will disappear. Most of us have no idea how many jobs offshore drilling funds in the United States.[/QUOTE]

The weight of the BOPs required for deepwater drilling is huge. I recently heard of a rig that landed a BOP on a Template designed for 8 wells. The weight completely destroyed the Template structure.