There once was a Brit named Alcor
Whose posts became such a bore
his blood is so blue
so much better than you
and he’s BP’s very own whore.
[QUOTE=BLISTERS;38263]Don’t know if you have the power, but weak you sure are. Too weak to face the truth starring in your face. In constant denial and suffering from attention deficit which explains how come you are compelled to dedicate so much of time at harping over and over like a fundamentalist. Caution: the anger and frustration you harbor might burn a hole in you. Now go and get some sleep least you chuck another tantrum here for the rest of the world to see.[/QUOTE]
Strong in knowledge. No question about it. You are weak in that you have no idea about the oil industry. I know how to shut in a well. And I don’t need you or any Operator to decide that for me.
Early on there was some interest on the hole in the helo platform on DWH. The narative for Stephen Davis a TO welder on board that night may help. It is also interesting he had spent nearly 12 hours welding the welding the transporter platform for the blowout preventer (BOP) just before the accident.
{"[I]Davis found another staircase. On deck, screaming workers were sliding through mud, looking for their designated lifeboats. The reserves of helicopter fuel and diesel caught fire and exploded.[/I]"
[QUOTE=alcor;38268]Strong in knowledge. No question about it. You are weak in that you have no idea about the oil industry. I know how to shut in a well. And I don’t need you or any Operator to decide that for me.[/QUOTE]
Are you implying that TO did not :- -Shut in the well ? -Attempt to Shut-in the well at all -Tried but could not shut-in the well What sort of a Shut in method does BP use for a sub sea 5000 " ft well ? Hard or Soft ? How about getting you bum buddy mates in BP to show us the BOP pressure test choke/csg charts/graphs ?
[QUOTE=Texanne;38267]There once was a Brit named Alcor
Whose posts became such a bore
his blood is so blue
so much better than you
and he’s BP’s very own whore.[/QUOTE]
How eloquent your poetry is. Your mind is immense!
[QUOTE=BLISTERS;38270]Are you implying that TO did not :- -Shut in the well ? -Attempt to Shut-in the well at all -Tried but could not shut-in the well What sort of a Shut in method does BP use for a sub sea 5000 " ft well ? Hard or Soft ? How about getting you bum buddy mates in BP to show us the BOP pressure test choke/csg charts/graphs ?[/QUOTE]
Blisters,
You are the perfect example of an ignorant person who knows nothing of when to interpret what the well tells you. I have offered vast amounts of data of when this well should have been closed in. Try 1700 hrs. Look through the posts. You are a fool for commenting without having looked at the charts, a classic example of the sheep. For god’s sake look at the posts.
This URL:
http://markimoore.com/relief-well-status-as-of-june-26-2010/
states:
The primary relief well, drilling by Development Driller 3, is currently at a depth of 16,400 feet. Crews have begun cementing and casing the well liner. Meanwhile, the ranging process continues in order to ensure that the well bore target is met.
This has got to be good news!
[QUOTE=alcor;38266]So, where would you direct us in order to get your pound of flesh?[/QUOTE]
Umm, I gather that you did not read my post about joint and several liability. For a start, see this: http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/joint+and+several+liability Talk to your drilling contractor company’s lawyers: they will be glad to explain the concept further.
Alcor,
at best I have with me the last 2 hr Halliburton Data engineering logs which start at 20:00hr. If you have logs that start from 17:00hr or earlier then be a good Shepard and point me to where they are at. There’s about 162 pages of this thread going and I am not as obsessed as you are to know where this data you claim you have offered is sitting at. I don’t get paid for contributing to this thread. I do it during a spare few minutes to support my brothers and sisters who live along the gulf coastline. We know it could happen to us where we are at. So we are not going to sit by idle and wait for that day to come.
Shortly I will be taking my grand kids for a walk outdoors. We will be driving past a BP petrol kiosk on the way. I will point out the BP logo to the kids. One is 4 and the other 6 and I will tell them the story of what BP did in the GOM and show them pictures of dead sea creatures and innocent pelicans and other birds dying a slow death. The older one will be making a class presentation with various JPG picture files to her class on Monday.
By the way, and I swear no adult influenced this : My grand daughter has entitled her presentation " WHat BP did to the pelicans ". We are not commies, tree huggers, left wing activists or terrorists but hard working oilfield folks.
[QUOTE=BLISTERS;38275]Alcor,
at best I have with me the last 2 hr Halliburton Data engineering logs which start at 20:00hr. If you have logs that start from 17:00hr or earlier then be a good Shepard and point me to where they are at. There’s about 162 pages of this thread going and I am not as obsessed as you are to know where this data you claim you have offered is sitting at. I don’t get paid for contributing to this thread. I do it during a spare few minutes to support my brothers and sisters who live along the gulf coastline. We know it could happen to us where we are at. So we are not going to sit by idle and wait for that day to come.
Shortly I will be taking my grand kids for a walk outdoors. We will be driving past a BP petrol kiosk on the way. I will point out the BP logo to the kids. One is 4 and the other 6 and I will tell them the story of what BP did in the GOM and show them pictures of dead sea creatures and innocent pelicans and other birds dying a slow death. The older one will be making a class presentation with various JPG picture files to her class on Monday.[/QUOTE]
You better add a T and an O. And try to give them the full picture, not an early version of the truth.
Regards the hyperlinks, try this:
http://energycommerce.house.gov/documents/20100525/Memo.BP.Internal.Investigation.pdf
I’m sick of you people commenting without any prior knowledge.
[QUOTE=dell;38274]Umm, I gather that you did not read my post about joint and several liability. For a start, see this: http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/joint+and+several+liability Talk to your drilling contractor company’s lawyers: they will be glad to explain the concept further.[/QUOTE]
I don’t even need to look at your link. BP, are responsible for the spill and all consequent costs associated with the well’s failure. But, TO failed to control the well.
[QUOTE=rlanasa;38193]A good defense attorney will blame that one on the environmentalist . For more than a decade the eco Nazis have demanded all the drilling fluids be recycled. Leaving drilling fluids in the hole is a environmental No No. I expect that order came from the team onshore. I would also point out taking the mud out takes time and money. It kills the rush to finish cutting corners case. … ![/QUOTE]
Wanna bet? With, as Alcor endlessly explains, pressures being odd, it makes sense to put in much lighter fluids? Hell, [B][I]I[/I][/B] could convince a Gulf Coast jury on that one! (Notice how the rebuttal is an ‘elevator speech’, and quite comprehensible to most anyone? And notice how easy it was to knock your point back?)
Here is a pre lim. outline of the "blow out prevention bill of 2010’’… I did not see, an acoustic switch, requirement, tho. http://energycommerce.house.gov/documents/20100625/Discussion.Draft.Blowout.Prevention.Act.2010.pdf
Let’s do a little math on the stack lean. The stack is connected to 22 inch casing that goes 2,870 feet below the mud line. This casing was cemented with returns to the mudline, I believe. Outside of this was 28 inch casing 1150 feet below the mudline and cemented with returns to the mudline. Outside of this was 36 inch conductor casing 254 feet below the mudline and it also cemented with returns to the mudline. If this entire string of casing eroded and leaned, that is it did not “kink” the stack would have to be displaced the following distances from it’s original location for the lean angles in the table below:
0 deg > 2870 tan (0) = 0
2 deg > 2870 tan (2) = 100 feet offset
3 deg > 2870 tan (3) = 150 feet offset
10 deg > 2870 tan(10) = 506 feet offset
Now IMHO I don’t see the mud disturbed around the stack 100, nor 150 nor an incredible 506 feet. I know it is like pudding I am told, and could reflow. But since it appears to still show the washout from the jet excavation for the installing the conductor casing, I don’t think the stack has [B]tipped.[/B]
Now, the bulls eyes show that there is a 2 or 3 degree lean to the stack depending on where you are on the stack. One has to assume it was installed within ± 0.5 or 1 degree maximum. Therefore the incredible torque of the DWH when it went off station keeping must have “[B]kinked[/B]” this casing system. I find it hard to envision the forces that “kinked” a 36 inch diameter tube with 1.25 inch wall thickness, but than again I find it equally hard to envision the 52,487 ton (105,174,000 lb) displacement! That is one heck of a weight on the end of a one mile lever…
The statement by the Admiral of 10 to 12 degree lean, must relate to the lean of the flex joint.
Oh, and as an aside to the “issue” clogging up the forum… Me thinks he is succeeding in diluting the technical content we used to see in this thread. Is this where we want to go?
[QUOTE=alcor;38277]I don’t even need to look at your link. BP, are responsible for the spill and all consequent costs associated with the well’s failure. But, TO failed to control the well.[/QUOTE]
Actually, Alcor, that you wouldn’t even bother to peruse the site that I brought up (twice!) and the point that I was, thereby making is emblematic and symptomatic of why dialog with you, here, is useless. No, BP is [B][I]not[/I][/B] necessarily going to be [I]solely[/I] responsible for the costs. Some other corporation [I]might[/I] end up holding the tar baby (and, OMG, in this context that is beyond bad as a pun, but it is also core truth). That is why Anadarko got out front, setting itself up to be a plaintiff against its partner on M252, BP.
Johnny one-notes, by definition, get tiresome.
[QUOTE=alcor;38277]… BP, are responsible for the spill and all consequent costs associated with the well’s failure. But, TO failed to control the well.[/QUOTE]
Alcor, does this mean that BP is responsible for the huge mess on the ocean that is causing all the distress? Also, if TO failed to control the well (read all the right guages, push all the right buttons and pump all the right stuff) does TO have TOTAL control over their actions or do they need to answer to bigger people?
[QUOTE=BLISTERS;38135]Agree with you about the erosion but disagree about the unstoppable part. If/when they intercept MC252 beneath the source of the influx they should be able to kill it. The hard part is getting the correct kill rate. Pump too fast and they might create and underground blowout. The well might, by now be blowing out from multiple zones. I am confident they will kill it but I fear most that BP will, after the kill, make the world believe all is well and that they have saved the gulf. That swede has already been alluding to this in statements he made last week.[/QUOTE]
I confer… the hardest part will be the kill rate followed by maintaining enough volume (this latter part should be covered with the mud barges etc). One of the crucial parts will be the size of the holes/communication paths they make thru’ the steel 7" casing on the Macondo well.
Barite is an excellent LCM but I’m sure they will be introducing other LCM into their plans. There will be a large amount of co-mixing of mud and oil initially so there is the potential for barite to drop out if the overall flowrate gets low enough. This could cause some problems.
BigMoose earlier mentioned the relief well running parallel to the original well for some distance. This makes logical sense as if they establish a flow path near the bottom of the well, they will then have more options for establishing more holes higher up if the bottom ones plug, give insufficent flow thru’ etc.
Kill mud weights?.. I killed a huge shallow water flow several years ago… it took 3 attempts and about a week to finally stop it. (Our biggest problem was mixing enough 15ppg mud on the rig).
My guess would be they would start with around 14ppg as this is what the relief well will most like have/need at that point in time (the relief wells also need to consider their own individual well control scenarios) then progress to a higher mud weight.
Simple calculations show that the 13ppg sand at 17,821ft will require a minimum of 14.8ppg just to balance the pressure, so with added margins it’s likely to be 15+ppg.
The best LCM is cement… assuming you can get it in the right places in sufficient volumes.
I have been asked a question I do not feel qualified to answer as I am only a semi-retired mechanical engineer that occasionally visits oil rigs.
The question is this: Once the relief wells are drilled when will the pressure be relieved to the point where oil stops coming out of the Macondo well?
Will it be instantaneous? I think I know the answers but there are wiser heads with much more experience and expertise than I have that can answer these questions right here on gCaptain.
So, what’s the answer?
Thanks
Tengineer
[QUOTE=bigmoose;38280]Let’s do a little math on the stack lean…
…
Now, the bulls eyes show that there is a 2 or 3 degree lean to the stack depending on where you are on the stack. One has to assume it was installed within ± 0.5 or 1 degree maximum. Therefore the incredible torque of the DWH when it went off station keeping must have “[B]kinked[/B]” this casing system. I find it hard to envision the forces that “kinked” a 36 inch diameter tube with 1.25 inch wall thickness, but than again I find it equally hard to envision the 52,487 ton (105,174,000 lb) displacement! That is one heck of a weight on the end of a one mile lever…
The statement by the Admiral of 10 to 12 degree lean, must relate to the lean of the flex joint.
[/QUOTE]
Good points bigmoose.
I’ve seen BOP stacks “wobble around” several degrees due to poor/bad cement jobs around 30&20" casings or due to degradation of the seabed and it’s ability to support those casings, even though the 20" was a good cement job.
The debris from jetting and subsequent drilling for the 28 & 22" casing usually leaves behind a big mound of cuttings rather than a crater. On one pic I have seen (some time ago) there appeared to be what I call a “gyration crater” caused by the wobbling of the BOP/WHD combination. Was it there from day 1 or is it more recent… I don’t know. (bp should know).
I agree re the possible damage caused by the falling riser. Just how much bend was introduced… ?? the bullseye reading on the wellhead should originally have been 1 degree or less (basic practise) therefore we have to accept the BOP also around 1 degree for the original readings. Just what those readings are now…? I have not seen any info except some pics from the 10th June which show the BOP at around 3 degrees (It could be more because the view angle is wrong… to correctly read the bulls eyes ROV needs to be as vertical above it as possible).
Could the 10-12 degrees be the Flex Joint… quite possible.
[QUOTE=New Orleans Lady;38225]I would like to share this: I got very ticked off when I saw pictures, of clean up workers, using what they called " absororbant pads’ to soak up an ocean full of oil sludge. How insulting to our intelligence!!! Those pads are good for soaking up a max of 800cc, that’s approx a little less than a quart of fluid. And, on top of that the clean up workers are not wearing “respirators” to protect their lungs from the toxic fumes, of the corexic dispersant. [/QUOTE]
You are correct re the pads… they are designed for mopping up minor spillages, around say a leaking pipe. Not designed for the huge amounts of gunge that are coming ashore.
As for respirators… they need some kind of respirator. I think it’s time the press or others start asking questions as to why the health of these workers are being put at risk?