Deepwater Horizon - Transocean Oil Rig Fire

Offshore
5122

[QUOTE=ExCompanyMan;39956]The MI guy explained that a 450bbl LCM 16ppb pill was used as spacer!!! No wonder they could not use the choke on the kill manifold when that came back![/QUOTE]

And they had two pills, Forma-squeeze and Forma-set that were mixed two weeks prior to this use, and combined them into one big pill. Possibly for BP to satisfy an environmental law for exempted waste that the waste must touch the well bore before being discharged. As the MI guy said, you couldn’t just pump it in the pits and then discharge it. It has to be “used” for something before you can just dump it. If they hadn’t used this loophole, they would have had to dispose of it as hazardous waste.

Edit: a followup question lead to the possibility of BP trying to skirt environmental law for waste discharge.

5123

[QUOTE=DDdon;39943]Look… you can have the very best policies on the books, but if the people in the field ignore them - and the culture of the company provides for the man in the field to ignore them - then they are only that - words on a page - i.e. Talking the Talk but NOT Walking the Walk.[/QUOTE]

The culture in AMOCO and ARCO has taken an insurmountable time to change. Remember, we’re dealing with people who think they’re GOD. The GOM is infested with these creatures, and all Operators have them. Why? You tell me!

5124

[QUOTE=Steamer;39947]Great expectations but not much reality. Even if the bore was of a diameter adequate to support convection currents from the reservoir the temperature at the mudline will be very close to that of the surrounding seawater. The idea that it would actually be hotter than while flowing is just fantasy. And that is assuming the bore is filled with liquid. Since there is considerable gas in the reservoir, the bore is probably now gas filled for the top portion and conduction of heat through gas is very much less than oil. [/QUOTE] I was referring to conduction not convection via fluid and metal under static shut-in conditions. Hottest during full swing dynamic flow - drop in temperature at shut-in - followed by gradual increase in pressure and temperature over time under static shut-in conditions. I doubt very much gas will liberate itself from liquids such as oil or formation water at 5000 ft albeit over time the gas component of liquids at the surface would increase. Under dynamic conditions gas will expand as it rises.Under static shut in conditions gas will migrate upward without expanding but will retain bottom hole pressure acquired from the depths where it enters the well. When it gets to the top it would act like a cocked spring exerting pressure, hence temperature at the wellhead on top of temperature conducted up to the well. The notion of a neat compact column of gas nicely segregated from fluids is text book stuff. In reality a gas influx is strung along commingling within liquid fluid column. If it were like you envisioned the oilfield will dispense with mud-gas seperators and vacuum degassers.

5125

[QUOTE=alvis;39961]And they had two pills, Forma-squeeze and Forma-set that were mixed two weeks prior to this use, and combined them into one big pill. Possibly for BP to satisfy an environmental law for exempted waste that the waste must touch the well bore before being discharged. As the MI guy said, you couldn’t just pump it in the pits and then discharge it. It has to be “used” for something before you can just dump it. If they hadn’t used this loophole, they would have had to dispose of it as hazardous waste.

Edit: a followup question lead to the possibility of BP trying to skirt environmental law for waste discharge.[/QUOTE]

Amazing. Mudman who admits no understanding or training in well control.

5126

Mudman & council think the flow-out flowline paddle quantifies returned volume. Flow out sensor only gives an empirical trend of flow out. It is not a flow-meter. Pit volume sensors quantify volumes pumped in and returned volumes.

5127

[QUOTE=BLISTERS;39965]Amazing. Mudman who admits no understanding or training in well control.[/QUOTE]

No big surprise. Big surprise that they had 1400 psi DP pressure during inflow test and then lost fluid in annulus and contributed this to the annular preventer ‘leaking’.

5128

[QUOTE=BLISTERS;39964]I was referring to conduction not convection via fluid and metal under static shut-in conditions. Hottest during full swing dynamic flow - drop in temperature at shut-in - followed by gradual increase in pressure and temperature over time under static shut-in conditions. I doubt very much gas will liberate itself from liquids such as oil or formation water at 5000 ft albeit over time the gas component of liquids at the surface would increase. Under dynamic conditions gas will expand as it rises.Under static shut in conditions gas will migrate upward without expanding but will retain bottom hole pressure acquired from the depths where it enters the well. When it gets to the top it would act like a cocked spring exerting pressure, hence temperature at the wellhead on top of temperature conducted up to the well. The notion of a neat compact column of gas nicely segregated from fluids is text book stuff. In reality a gas influx is strung along commingling within liquid fluid column. If it were like you envisioned the oilfield will dispense with mud-gas seperators and vacuum degassers.[/QUOTE]

WTF are you talking about? Temperature increase under static conditions? Rising gas bubbles retaining pressure without expanding? Bubbles acting like cocked springs? Heat conducted up X many thousand feet of bore and tube?

Have a nice day and consider some summer school science courses.

5129

[QUOTE=ExCompanyMan;39967]No big surprise. Big surprise that they had 1400 psi DP pressure during inflow test and then lost fluid in annulus and contributed this to the annular preventer ‘leaking’.[/QUOTE]

Approximately, if the choke line was filled with seawater @ 8.33 ppg and the wrong set of rams isolated the choke side outlet from the wellbore then we have, ie 5000 ft x 8.33 ppg x 0.052 = 2165 psi ;for chokeline hydrostatic & air gap omitted 5000 ft x 0.052 x 14 ppg = 3640 psi for OBM hydrostatic in riser, difference eing 1474 psi. My point being the inflow test was ok but they did not prime the chokelines with OBM.

5130

[QUOTE=Steamer;39968]WTF are you talking about? Temperature increase under static conditions? Rising gas bubbles retaining pressure without expanding? Bubbles acting like cocked springs? Heat conducted up X many thousand feet of bore and tube?

Have a nice day and consider some summer school science courses.[/QUOTE]

I think you will fit nicely with the BP engineering dept. They hire people like you.

5131

[QUOTE=BLISTERS;39969]Approximately, if the choke line was filled with seawater @ 8.33 ppg and the wrong set of rams isolated the choke side outlet from the wellbore then we have, ie 5000 ft x 8.33 ppg x 0.052 = 2165 psi ;for chokeline hydrostatic & air gap omitted 5000 ft x 0.052 x 14 ppg = 3640 psi for OBM hydrostatic in riser, difference eing 1474 psi. My point being the inflow test was ok but they did not prime the chokelines with OBM.[/QUOTE]

You would fit in nicely with BP as well!! Idea is to isolate all this back pressure (with rams if annular is leaking) so that you only read pressure from a possible leak!

5132

[QUOTE=BLISTERS;39966]Mudman & council think the flow-out flowline paddle quantifies returned volume. Flow out sensor only gives an empirical trend of flow out. It is not a flow-meter. Pit volume sensors quantify volumes pumped in and returned volumes.[/QUOTE]

I was hoping that “the council” would have learned from their mistakes and stupidity during the first round of the investigation, and be more professional this time around. I guess not.

I suggest we all start bombarding MMS with sensible questions that they should be asking.

Better still… BLISTERS & CM1?, if you are in the Gulf area you might want to consider offering your services to MMS as adviser on these investigations.

5133

[QUOTE=ExCompanyMan;39973]You would fit in nicely with BP as well!! Idea is to isolate all this back pressure (with rams if annular is leaking) so that you only read pressure from a possible leak![/QUOTE]

With approximately 14 to 14.3 ppg displaced OBM in the riser plus 16.0 ppg approx spacer - 450 bbl I think the mud man said above the rams and 8.33 ppg seawater down below rams to 3000 ft approx, below mud line would the rams hold such a pressure differential acting from the top ? Hint: Rams are not designed to take pressure from above.

5134

[QUOTE=alvis;39961]And they had two pills, Forma-squeeze and Forma-set that were mixed two weeks prior to this use, and combined them into one big pill. Possibly for BP to satisfy an environmental law for exempted waste that the waste must touch the well bore before being discharged. As the MI guy said, you couldn’t just pump it in the pits and then discharge it. It has to be “used” for something before you can just dump it. If they hadn’t used this loophole, they would have had to dispose of it as hazardous waste.

Edit: a followup question lead to the possibility of BP trying to skirt environmental law for waste discharge.[/QUOTE]

Thanks for the info alvis. That could explain why I couldn’t understand why they pumped LCM ahead of the seawater instead of a simple hi-vis pill.

5135

[QUOTE=Alf;39976]Thanks for the info alvis. That could explain why I couldn’t understand why they pumped LCM ahead of the seawater instead of a simple hi-vis pill.[/QUOTE]

Anyone currently having problems with the live links to the hearings ?

5136

[QUOTE=BLISTERS;39977]Anyone currently having problems with the live links to the hearings ?[/QUOTE]

I do and always will have… it’s inherent due to where I live.

I’ll wait until the final videos get posted somewhere and then download and watch them.

Thanks for the updates though, everyone.

5137

[QUOTE=BLISTERS;39977]Anyone currently having problems with the live links to the hearings ?[/QUOTE]

Just to clarify, the hearings are over for the day which is why the feeds are down. Tyrone Benton was a no-show.

5138

I would appreciate the professional opinions of those here on exactly what is being seen in this video capture from yesterday of the sonar sweep.

Please check the video beginning 4.5 minutes into it and tell me what it is we’re seeing.


Thank you.

[QUOTE=Alf;39952]I’ll give it a go… but don’t hold me to it!

But firstly, the best I can decipher the number information is:
the coordinates (top LH corner) are 1,202,668.4E, 10,331,723.4N. Google earth shows that to be approx 0.1 miles (say +/-500ft) NW of the Macondo well.
Depth deciphered at ?1584?m, and Altitude at ?11.5?m (top RH corner). The altitude shows that the ROV is not sat on the seabed??

There is a lot of reflected light from what is in the water, so it makes it difficult to see much detail. Also, the only physical reference point is the top framework of the ROV which comes into view beyond 4:58mins. Because we can see this framework this shows that the camera is not zoomed in too much.
Other than that there is no other reference point that I can see so it makes it difficult to understand exactly what we are looking at. Also, the ROV is engulfed in whatever it is… it would have been better if the ROV was further away giving a wider angle shot for more clarity.

At first I thought it was ROV thruster wash because the colour was basically orangish. However, beyond 4.5mins the colour definately changes to greyish/dark (could be oil?) and it looks like big eruptions coming from the bottom of the screen upwards. Plus there are more whitish particles (could be hydrates?) flowing.

So given the above data… yes I would say it is an oil eruption. The difficulty is seeing where it’s coming from ie seabed or elsewhere.

(If anyone has a hi-res capture of this event things might be clearer to see and interpret).[/QUOTE]

Thank you, Alf. It appears you’re dead on.

[B]BREAKING Feds: Methane seeping from at least two places in seafloor; Located 100-200 meters and 3 kilometers from well[/B]

http://www.floridaoilspilllaw.com/breaking-feds-methane-seeping-from-at-least-two-places-in-seafloor-located-100-200-meters-and-3-kilometers-from-well

Video at link

5139

[QUOTE=BLISTERS;39975] Hint: Rams are not designed to take pressure from above.[/QUOTE] you’re right…been away too long.

5140

[QUOTE=ExCompanyMan;39981]you’re right…been away too long.[/QUOTE]

I know this for sure but I am not sure of the scenario I presented. I will be meeting with some well control experts this week. I will ask them exactly what such a tolerance is, if any, for pressure exerted from the top in a situation like the one I described and get back. I am not sure either about the inflow test but based on my own inference but I suspect it was a BP buy one get one free technique…ie: displace OBM with sea water whilst using the differential created to conduct an inflow test. To me riser margins must always be reckoned with even when doing a negative flow test, no matter how deep or shallow the water is.

5141

[QUOTE=alcor;39963]The culture in AMOCO and ARCO has taken an insurmountable time to change. Remember, we’re dealing with people who think they’re GOD. The GOM is infested with these creatures, and all Operators have them. Why? You tell me![/QUOTE]

Sorry, Alcor: the weekend FT piece, that I cited and quoted earlier, made it clear the the Gulf team is BP’s very top and most elite team. As for your pounding on Amoco and ARCO, you’re going to need a new drum.