http://energycommerce.house.gov/documents/20100625/Discussion.Draft.Blowout.Prevention.Act.2010.pdf
The link above will demonstrate where some in Congress are trying to take us. The question we should all ask is will this take our job or our neighbors job? Will this take and real risk off the table?
[QUOTE=dell;38128]Alvis,
I think–but am NOT sure–that BP, by the terms of the lease, would have had the responsibility not to have leaks, and to do cleanup. And so, that’s the way it was addressed at the start. The volume of the spill is obviously far beyond what even BP was equipped and ready to handle. The feds could, I expect, step back in, under the terms of the lease, if BP was doing (blank) inadequately/improperly.
Geodude raises a good point that I agree with, and it would not have to be BP and its contractors that would get the bids. Instead, it would be open to federal contracting procedures (which, as you remember, has the ‘shovel-ready’ projects under way THIS summer). There are also ways to speed this up enormously, as in the 9–11 cleanup, but I don’t know how those mechanisms work.[/QUOTE]
By the terms of the lease BP have satisfied MMS’s requirements for spill containment and control. This means everything was Gov’t approved.
Alcor, I m sure bp’s records were <changed> reflected to cover, themselves.That’s why the dna needs to be taken on the surface, from below the gom, and examined. Too many former employees are saying the same thing. THey would report “something wrong”, and it was ignored. :You have some few former bp guys here, saying that as well. Alcor, I am beginning to wonder if you even made some careless judgements, because you are obsessed, with protecting the “bad guys” Are you in their fraternity?
[QUOTE=rlanasa;38171]http://energycommerce.house.gov/documents/20100625/Discussion.Draft.Blowout.Prevention.Act.2010.pdf
The link above will demonstrate where some in Congress are trying to take us. The question we should all ask is will this take our job or our neighbors job? Will this take and real risk off the table?[/QUOTE]
Yes it will. It means that they haven’t recognised fundamental decision-making mistakes. Recognise these, and all go back to work…with Big Brother watching!
[QUOTE=alcor;38164]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.[/QUOTE]
You can blow it out your ass on this one Alcor. Anadarko was not consulted when the casing design change was made or when the decision not to follow Halliburton’s recommendations was made. You don’t know what you are talking about on this one pal. That’s why Anadarko is taking them to court. They were also neglegent in their obligations to their business partners as well as the environment as well as the people on board the rig as well as the people on the gulf coast as well as the entire industry. You may kiss my ass now, because your talking about somehing you have absolutely no clue about.
[QUOTE=company man 1;38175]You can blow it out your ass on this one Alcor. Anadarko was not consulted when the casing design change was made or when the decision not to follow Halliburton’s recommendations was made. You don’t know what you are talking about on this one pal. That’s why Anadarko is taking them to court. They were also neglegent in their obligations to their business partners as well as the environment as well as the people on board the rig as well as the people on the gulf coast as well as the entire industry. You may kiss my ass now, because your talking about somehing you have absolutely no clue about.[/QUOTE]
I can assure you the partners were consulted on change of use of this well from exploration to Production. What happened consequently is down to the decisions on the rig. Their financial investment was a risk. It hasn’t worked out. Naturally, they’re going to the courts. Are you so blind?
[QUOTE=rlanasa;38168]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]
“It will take ten hours to run these centralizers. I do not like this!”, Said Mr. BP.
“Due to the lack of centralizers there will be a severe gas flow problem.”, Mr. Halliburton.
Excuse me, but what caused the rig to blow up? Was it air? Was it water? I believe everyone on board reported it was gas.
bp is manipulating the system.MMS approved, over the phone,instances, which should have been investigated , according to the policy. yes, they got approval, but that does not justify their actions. If my head nurse approves for me to call in a Dr’s prescription,for some medication, with out the the Dr’s permission, and I know I can “get away with it”. as well know that is against the law, and the patient dies from an allergic reaction, then I can not justify my actions because I got approval. I am guilty of prescribing medication, without a license, and can be jailed for manslaughter.
[QUOTE=alcor;38177]I can assure you the partners were consulted on change of use of this well from exploration to Production. What happened consequently is down to the decisions on the rig. Their financial investment was a risk. It hasn’t worked out. Naturally, they’re going to the courts. Are you so blind?[/QUOTE]
They weren’t consulted on the casing design change, the lack of centralizer placement, or the decisions of how the cement job was performed. Don’t worry about it Alcor. Whatever is left over from the scraps will be taken by Anadarko & Mitsui. You have no chance of survival.
[QUOTE=New Orleans Lady;38173]Alcor, I m sure bp’s records were <changed> reflected to cover, themselves.That’s why the dna needs to be taken on the surface, from below the gom, and examined. Too many former employees are saying the same thing. THey would report “something wrong”, and it was ignored. :You have some few former bp guys here, saying that as well. Alcor, I am beginning to wonder if you even made some careless judgements, because you are obsessed, with protecting the “bad guys” Are you in their fraternity?[/QUOTE]
I am involved with a drilling contractor. I am not prepared to suggest what my job is in case of reprisals for commenting. If you are prepared to listen I can offer expertise on drilling wells and who holds responsibility on everyday decisions. That is generally always with the oil companies. But we, the drilling contractors, decide when we shut in and protect our rig. And that;s above God’s orders.
[QUOTE=company man 1;38180]They weren’t consulted on the casing design change, the lack of centralizer placement, or the decisions of how the cement job was performed. Don’t worry about it Alcor. Whatever is left over from the scraps will be taken by Anadarko & Mitsui. You have no chance of survival.[/QUOTE]
Do you want to eat more humble pie?
Geodude and ~~~ I liked your posts that tried to get a discussion going on the intercept wall status and methods. I have been reading on that also, and since this is 4th hand, all should take it with a grain of salt. Perhaps it will rekindle the interest, and folks will add details that are more sure.
My reading said that Boots and Coots are on DDIII to manage the well kill operation. They mentioned the gent in charge with Boots and Coots, but being old… I forgot his name and didn’t save the link. The gent went on to say this man is quite experienced and careful. That he would not likely “barge” into a direct intercept with the blowout well. He implied that they may get the intercept well to parallel the blowout casing for a “fair” distance. (Sort of how a double barreled shotgun parallels the barrels.) That they wanted the formation to “talk to them” so that they can get a feel for what is going on. Try to decipher if the flow is up the annulus, up the tapered string or up both. That the first step may be explosive penetration of the kill well and the blowout well casing to get a type of controlled communication between wells. Then proceed with the kill in a considered fashion as necessary.
That means that the magnetometer readings that you discovered could be days away from getting the bores parallel, and the kill well to the TD that the Boots and Coots manager wants. I think they said that the kill well will over drill the formation first.
Sorry for the sketchiness, and hope some can add and clarify.
[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]
Cool. No need to make busy work, nor to issue requierments that no one can meet. I just got the feeling you were waving off any adjustments to regs. One problem with this blowout, maybe, is that regs were hedged, so that needs to be addressed too. Exactly what the regs should be a [B][I]huge[/I][/B] conversation, and that is what lobbyists are for.
[QUOTE=alcor;38182]Do you want to eat more humble pie?[/QUOTE]
DO you have proof they consulted with Anadarko or Mitsui on these decisions?
[QUOTE=company man 1;38178]“It will take ten hours to run these centralizers. I do not like this!”, Said Mr. BP.
“Due to the lack of centralizers there will be a severe gas flow problem.”, Mr. Halliburton.
Excuse me, but what caused the rig to blow up? Was it air? Was it water? I believe everyone on board reported it was gas.[/QUOTE]
The reason the rig blew up was because uncontrolled volumes of mud escaped from the well and no action was taken. Pressure increases were ignored. You understood this yesterday when you relented to my better knowledge.
What a dreadful thought, we have an expert wittness, in our midst.
[QUOTE=alcor;38186]The reason the rig blew up was because uncontrolled volumes of mud escaped from the well and no action was taken. Pressure increases were ignored. You understood this yesterday when you relented to my better knowledge.[/QUOTE]
and whose idea was it to “insist after being challenged”, to replace the mud, with salt water? BP
To get a murder convictiion you would need a few more statements along these lines.
[I]That is nuts you are going to kill us all[/I]
[I]Tuff that is the way it going to be. Even if it means a few people get hurt we are going to finish this job tonight[/I]
So far there is no evidence some knew they were likely to get people hurt. Negligence maybe reckless action maybe. Murder not even close.
[QUOTE=company man 1;38178]“It will take ten hours to run these centralizers. I do not like this!”, Said Mr. BP.
“Due to the lack of centralizers there will be a severe gas flow problem.”, Mr. Halliburton.
Excuse me, but what caused the rig to blow up? Was it air? Was it water? I believe everyone on board reported it was gas.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=New Orleans Lady;38187]What a dreadful thought, we have an expert wittness, in our midst.[/QUOTE]
An expert interpreter with knowledge of the offshore industry. What to do. What not to do. When to assume command to protect our vessel and men onboard.
[QUOTE=alcor;38186]The reason the rig blew up was because uncontrolled volumes of mud escaped from the well and no action was taken. Pressure increases were ignored. You understood this yesterday when you relented to my better knowledge.[/QUOTE]
I relented to the fact that you’re an unreasonable asshole that can’t be reasoned with. I admitted that there were mistakes made in dealing with the displacement & the recognition of the negative tests by the company man & the drill crew. These mistakes did not cause this blowout to occur. They just failed to prevent it. The cause of the blowout was BP’s obvious negliegence in not paying attention to their own best practices manual as well as industry guidelines as well as the recommendations of their vendors. We are refighting the same battle & your attitude will be no different than before because you are the same asshole that has done the same thing for the past 5 weeks. Now if you have proof that BP consulted its partners of their casing design changes as well as their blatantly ignoring their vendor’s best recommendations which they were liable to do then provide it or do yourself a favor & quit showing your stupidity to everyone in the United States.