[QUOTE=New Orleans Lady;40181]Static kill could begin with in 48 hrs,what is ya lls take on that? http://www.cnn.com/2010/us/07/21/gulf.oil.disaster/index.html?video=true?video=true&hpt=T1[/QUOTE]
Why not just rip it open? they can’t kill it anyway. They know they’re out of business when this is over. Why not put the wood to everyone else in the process? Anything else you want to know? For those who say I am a paranoid dillusional, I ask weren’t they the very same ones who not too long ago said that a bottom kill was the only solution? Now they take the new company line hook, line, & sinker? I guess your only paranoid if you stand to get screwed by someone else’s stupidity.
[QUOTE=company man 1;40182]Why not just rip it open? they can’t kill it anyway. They know they’re out of business when this is over. Why not put the wood to everyone else in the process? Anything else you want to know? For those who say I am a paranoid dillusional, I ask weren’t they the very same ones who not too long ago said that a bottom kill was the only solution? Now they take the new company line hook, line, & sinker? I guess your only paranoid if you stand to get screwed by someone else’s stupidity.[/QUOTE]
what’s this ‘you’ you you’,I just asked a question,cool your jets, dumbass! And, I never said you were paranoid!!
[QUOTE=New Orleans Lady;40183]what’s this ‘you’ you you’,I just asked a question,cool your jets, dumbass! And, I never said you were paranoid!![/QUOTE]
NOL, may I suggest a good bottle of Cazadores Respasdo and some downtime!
We are spoilt for choice right now: (1) bullheading would probably be fine providing the pressure’s kept low (2) Bottom kill is just around the corner. (3) we can sit tight with the well integrity intact. Politics, legal issues, weather and “abundance of caution” are probably high up in the decision process. The best brains, rigs and kit is out there. Barring the unexpected, this story is coming to a close. I personally like the bullhead option - maybe its the name…
Just listened to the 3pm BP technical briefing with Kent Wells. He said there is a clearly defined disturbance in the Caribbean that could potentially impact operations. He said that due to this disturbance, they do not have enough of a good weather window in order to finish up with the placement of the casing and cementing of the first relief well. They placed a plug, storm packer, at 300’ this morning so that it would take less time for them to move off location in the event of bad weather. Kent anticipated needing a window of 2-4 days in order to complete these two operations.
Kent said the well integrity test is continuing. The current pressure is 6,850 psi and the pressure is rising at less than one psi per hour. There is no evidence that the well does not have integrity.
Talking about the static kill option, BP has written detailed procedures on performing the static kill and it has undergone several technical reviews. When asked a question of when they would seek approval from Thad Allen for this, Kent appeared to state they they are already indirectly seeking approval. He said that they have already gone through the technical reviews and due processes (my wording) that they have had to previously go through before when seeking approval. It sounded like they might be treading a bit more lightly now than when Doug Suttles blurted out they were closing in the well with the cap until the relief wells were completed…
Edit: they will not start the static kill until the relief well is cased and cemented (and approved from Thad Allen of course). This means the static kill is being postponed until a suitable weather window is available.
[QUOTE=New Orleans Lady;40183]what’s this ‘you’ you you’,I just asked a question,cool your jets, dumbass! And, I never said you were paranoid!![/QUOTE]
I wasn’t refering to you NOLA. I was refering to Mr. Alcor. Check the post 5069.
[QUOTE=company man 1;40187]I wasn’t refering to you NOLA. I was refering to Mr. Alcor. Check the post 5069.[/QUOTE] I m sorry, cm1,<taking a deep breath,too early for cocktails>
[QUOTE=ex-pe-uk;40185]We are spoilt for choice right now: (1) bullheading would probably be fine providing the pressure’s kept low (2) Bottom kill is just around the corner. (3) we can sit tight with the well integrity intact. Politics, legal issues, weather and “abundance of caution” are probably high up in the decision process. The best brains, rigs and kit is out there. Barring the unexpected, this story is coming to a close. I personally like the bullhead option - maybe its the name…[/QUOTE]
What constitutes the unexpected? Did anyone bother to look at the video of the flow coming out of the ground from a few days ago? How unexpected is this going to be? I can’t wait to hear Alcor shift balme again from the cowboy mentality of America to the U.S. governrment for approving this insane request. I have done a LOT of well testing as well as BHP surveys & I can tell you that this well still having slow formation build up at this time is NOT normal for this well. This isn’t some west texas scrub well with 2 3/8" tubing that has super low perm & makes 300mcfd. This well by its very character has shown it should have reached maximum surface pressure within a couple of hours if not minutes.
I would also ask of Thad “dumbass” Allen, if it is true that as you say another “well” 2 miles away is leaking, does this not concern you? Is it normal for wells in the GOM to leak after abandonement?
[QUOTE=alcor;40127]There has been a suggestion that the MMS (New MMS…same characters), are responsible for ensuring the Senate Committee are up to date with all aspects of the investigation’s technical issues. Considering they are to be largely implicated, is this a good idea to have their advisers directing proceedings? They are the ones educating the Committee about the technical issues. Obviously, the committee won’t be able to take in all this technical knowledge without drilling and production experience and a science background. So, they’ll be guided as to how to see, by the 'New" MMS.[/QUOTE]
Gladly! First, the new MMS [I][U]can’t[/U][/I] be the same as the old MMS, because the old agency is being split into three parts, and, more to the point, the old #1 and #2 (who was a critical enabler and had been there like forever) have been pushed out. Second, if you think Senate Committee staff could be or would be dependent on a single source of information on [I]anything[/I], you are singularly naive about how the Committee process actually works. Ever hear of lobbyists? K Street? Scads of people, agencies, institutions, interest groups, corporations will be willing to, eager to put in their 2 pence (in your terms)–and will be heard. In fact, committee staff will likely have to resort to beating them all off with sticks.
Plus, the Senate staffers, particularly at the senior level, aren’t hired from amongst those who fell off turnip trucks. They’re used to special pleading, including from the agencies.
BP busted AGAIN for another Photoshopped image… Whoever oversees the media department is something else!
Is this guy Simmons credible? I need some expert opinion :http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwX9RXFRJD4
[QUOTE=New Orleans Lady;40193]Is this guy Simmons credible? I need some expert opinion :http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwX9RXFRJD4[/QUOTE]
Has an agenda.
Now this is really far out! I mean, there’s some crazy journalism on the web<read with caution>,it would make a good movie,tho!http://franzjtlee.blogspot.com/2010/07/oil-leaks-in-gulf-of-mexico-all-human.html
thanks CD,<I can not call you, dummy>
Hey Gents , Yall will appreciate this map http://www.gomr.mms.gov/homepg/lsesale/visual1.pdf
Hey Alcor looks like you and your pals getting left out.
http://royaldutchshellplc.com/
Exxon, Shell, Chevron and ConocoPhillips are expected to announce Thursday that they will each contribute 25 percent to a $1 billion pool of money to fund a new deepwater spill response strike force, called the Marine Well Containment Company.
The venture would be able to mobilize within 24 hours to capture and contain oil spills in depths of up to 10,000 feet.
BP was not asked to join the venture, but may, along with other companies operating in the Gulf, be able to use the strike force.
“We don’t want to distract them at all,” Rex Tillerson, Exxon’s chief executive of Exxon told the Wall Street Journal.
“BP was not asked to join the venture, but may, along with other companies operating in the Gulf, be able to use the strike force.”
[B]Please[/B] say that isn’t so! (wouldn’t it have been better to just say nothing?)
I agree with CM1, I want BP gone!!
[QUOTE=DogsDogsDogs;40201]“BP was not asked to join the venture, but may, along with other companies operating in the Gulf, be able to use the strike force.”
B]Please[/B] say that isn’t so! (wouldn’t it have been better to just say nothing?)
I agree with CM1, I want BP gone!![/QUOTE]
[B]RICO law made to combat Mafia used in BP lawsuits
RICO lawsuits accuse BP, Transocean of running longterm criminal racket in Gulf operations
[/B]
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/RICO-law-made-to-combat-Mafia-apf-2843357862.html?x=0
[QUOTE=DogsDogsDogs;40201]“BP was not asked to join the venture, but may, along with other companies operating in the Gulf, be able to use the strike force.”
[B]Please[/B] say that isn’t so! (wouldn’t it have been better to just say nothing?)
I agree with CM1, I want BP gone!![/QUOTE]
(Reuters) - BP Plc’s safety record would bar the company from getting new U.S. offshore oil and gas exploration leases for up to seven years under bill language passed on Wednesday by a U.S. House committee
[QUOTE=ex-pe-uk;40185]We are spoilt for choice right now: (1) bullheading would probably be fine providing the pressure’s kept low (2) Bottom kill is just around the corner. (3) we can sit tight with the well integrity intact. Politics, legal issues, weather and “abundance of caution” are probably high up in the decision process. The best brains, rigs and kit is out there. Barring the unexpected, this story is coming to a close. I personally like the bullhead option - maybe its the name…[/QUOTE]
To my simple brain, it only comes down to one thing: Which method has the lowest probablilty of blowing out the well underground?
I’d rather see some (relatively little) oil/gas flow into the GOM for a few days more than for a -lot- to flow for months (or years?).
Edit: You didn’t mention another option: Capture the flow so we can maximize the penalties. I’d sooner have them drive off with the choke cracked open if a storm comes than risk a subsea blowout. And the thought of BP getting out of paying for this debacle because we don’t have a real number for the flow just really pisses me off.