Believe me, they are just that incompetent. Anyone can go back & check my posts from the BEGINNING. I have been absolutely correct all along in my analysis. I will now thank myself & sign off for a few hours, while letting those who wish to scour through the massive treasure trove of knowledge that is this thread glean these truths & make themselves instantly smarter than ANY ONE working for British Petroleum.[QUOTE=Bob S;33915]Being cynical here. Sounds like bp believes it is more economical to let crude ‘spill’ into the gulf than to pump less harmful mud into the gulf. Regarding that sell bp suggestion. Check.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=anchorman;33893]Interior Secretary Ken Salazar told reporters this afternoon that the Obama Administration is ordering a moratorium on all off-shore oil and gas drilling activity from floating drilling rigs until the President’s commission on the BP incident has completed a more thorough review. At the same time, he said his agency is working to strengthen safety and oversight measures for deep water oil and gas exploration. The moratorium applies to wells in waters above a depth of 500 feet, including 33 deep water rigs that had been permitted in the Gulf of Mexico. Wells that have already started drilling are required to halt operations at the first safe stopping point and then take steps to secure the well.
The move comes as part of the Secretary’s 30-day review of the Deep Water Horizon drill explosion, requested by the President, which focuses on the two primary failures of the drilling process that that led to the disaster.
“One: the loss of well-control. And two: the failure of the blow out preventer mechanism,” Salazar explained.
Secretary Salazar said they are still investigating what went wrong on April 20th at the Deep Water Horizon rig, but the initial findings reveal that a number of problems occurred. He pointed to issues with the rig’s cementing, casing or perhaps both, which he said could have caused the blow out in the first place. Once the blow out occurred, Salazar said the blow out prevention mechanism did not work and that there are a host of questions around why it failed.
To address these concerns, Salazar said the administration is taking the following steps:
- require certification of all blow out preventers
- stronger well control
- blow out prevention and intervention procedures
- tougher inspections for deep water drilling operations
- expanded safety and training programs for rig workers
“Some of these measures we can implement immediately, others will take some time,” he said.
The moratorium also affects possible oil exploration in the outer continental shelf, postponing consideration of drilling there until 2011. Salazar said he is cancelling the proposed 2012 lease sale for drilling off the coast of Virginia, along with a lease sale for the Gulf of Mexico scheduled for this August.
“I believe we must proceed with the utmost caution as we examine the many questions the BP oil spill raises, that’s why we are pausing deepwater drilling and examine our systems to ensure that this type of disaster does not happen again,” he said.
Salazar said the new moratorium will not affect current production and that there is no moratorium on shallow water wells in the general application. The 591 deep water producing wells in the Gulf of Mexico, along with 4,515 shallow wells will be allowed to continue to harvest oil and natural gas.
- Yunji de Nies[/QUOTE]
I am presently working aboard a production facility which has a “temporary” drilling rig onboard. We were just notified that as of 1845 this evening, we have ceased all drilling operations as per instructions from town. This appears to be a bit much as we are using a “surface” BOP and drilling through existing production riser.
They have the benefit of drilling logs and the well logs, they might be using that data along with the acquired pump data to have surmised they are pumping the mud into a shallower thief zone, and so are bringing out enough diverter/fluid loss to plug off and push it low enough to get a kill
"…and so are bringing out enough diverter/fluid loss to plug off and push it low enough to get a kill"
Can you please elaborate on this? The way I read it your point is that they have losses into formation from above that are preventing mud from reaching the bottom/pay zone. We see mud returns (not crude) at the BOP-riser. CM1 believes that they have the HHP to move the volume but not the mud weight to accomplish the task. Would it be reasonable to think that they weighted up to 19+ppg without reducing well flow?
[QUOTE=pumpjack hand;33919]They have the benefit of drilling logs and the well logs, they might be using that data along with the acquired pump data to have surmised they are pumping the mud into a shallower thief zone, and so are bringing out enough diverter/fluid loss to plug off and push it low enough to get a kill[/QUOTE]
The only problem with your theory on a thief zone taking the mud is all the mud is spewing back & if a lower pressure formation was taking mud you’d have seen a lot of oil coming back by now.
[QUOTE=Bob S;33921]"…and so are bringing out enough diverter/fluid loss to plug off and push it low enough to get a kill"
Can you please elaborate on this? The way I read it your point is that they have losses into formation from above that are preventing mud from reaching the bottom/pay zone. We see mud returns (not crude) at the BOP-riser. CM1 believes that they have the HHP to move the volume but not the mud weight to accomplish the task. Would it be reasonable to think that they weighted up to 19+ppg without reducing well flow?[/QUOTE]
I doubt it. I heard another rumor a while ago from the rumor mill about an hour ago that BP used 14.2 PPG mud. I have no confirmation so the necessary disclaimer is attached, but if this the case then the idiot who figured the job didn’t take into account the instant lowering of hydrostatic pressure when the pumps were shut down. they probably realized this yesterday morning when I saw them pumping the mud they weren’t pumping. They were probably so full to the gills with low wieght mud they decide to pump it away to make room for kill weight mud. This would mean they could have pumped some 70,0000 BBLS. between yesterday morning & last night. If this is the case I hope they don’t do something desparate like pump junk shot until they give the heavier mud a chance to do its job.
They figure the flow is coming from behind pipe, don’t they? Their bottom hole assembly while drilling probably had a pressure sensor along with a complete suite of logs including acoustic so they know about where a thief zone would be, some thief zones can take 10K, 20K, 30K BPD so they use diverter in the mud to circulate, this well lost circulation a couple of times didn’t it and they know where? What’s their pump pressure now in this top kill? They figured the volume exiting the riser was at about 2500 psi pre-top kill didn’t they? Whatever they pump goes to the path of least resistance, wherever that is.
So, CM1, you are anticipating a major slug coming next? I suppose they would not consider this if losses to formation were suspected since that would just lead to more losses.
btw, what is the destination of a junk shot. Does it go down hole or is it intended to pack off the failed BOPs?
[QUOTE=pumpjack hand;33925]They figure the flow is coming from behind pipe, don’t they? Their bottom hole assembly while drilling probably had a pressure sensor along with a complete suite of logs including acoustic so they know about where a thief zone would be, some thief zones can take 10K, 20K, 30K BPD so they use diverter in the mud to circulate, this well lost circulation a couple of times didn’t it and they know where? What’s their pump pressure now in this top kill? They figured the volume exiting the riser was at about 2500 psi pre-top kill didn’t they? Whatever they pump goes to the path of least resistance, wherever that is.[/QUOTE]
I agree with the basis of your thinking & you are making very strong points. The evidence of solid mud, however points to wherever that mud was pumped it coming back from that place. Take for instance, there is another zone 2000’ above the pay that is taking mud to a great degree then you shut off pumping. The higher zone would come in unimpeded & bring back what it was producing before pumping & that’s black oil. it would just push aside the mud in the lower zone because of superior pressure & blow right past it.
As far as the pressures go, BP has not seen fit to let us LITTLE people in on their project. So we find ourselves SPECULATING once again.
[QUOTE=Bob S;33926]So, CM1, you are anticipating a major slug coming next? I suppose they would not consider this if losses to formation were suspected since that would just lead to more losses.
btw, what is the destination of a junk shot. Does it go down hole or is it intended to pack off the failed BOPs?[/QUOTE]
I don’t see how a slug could possibly hurt at this time unless as pumping jack pointed out that another zone swallowed it up then it would be kind of useless but probably wouldn’t hurt. BTW, just in case he is correct, which he could very well be, one would think pumping some fluid loss material mixed in couldn’t hurt either. In a situation like this, it won’t hurt to do either of these things before puming a junk shot.
The junk shot is intended to plug the BOPs. The only problem is it could plug off the hose first & the carrying fluid will have to be some kind of gel that will be much lighter than mud. You also have to be concerned with the materials plugging your pumping path & causing you to overpressure & do more damage to the stack than is already there & shutting down your ability to pump a kill yet allow the well to continue flowing unimpeded.
I read a report on BBC over an hour ago that said they were back to pumping again, so they are doing whatever they are doing. But say the kill went into many zones, and say there’s a zone right above the pay that is thieving the oil now, but a zone or two above that that just got fraced and is now flowing back mud, they probably had like zero zonal control. Did they even use diverter? Or what was the plan?
If mud weight was an issue, why wouldn’t they automatically use a heavier mud to begin with? They would just reach equilibrium with less mud wouldn’t they?
Just a guess here but I would think they would want to use the mud with the least weight that is effective. I would think that the heavier weight mud would have a higher viscosity therefore require more HP to pump at the same flow rate. If they were concerned about the flow rate, they would probably have been trying to balance the desired flow rate with the desired weight of the kill. Once again, no oil knowledge here…just some general fluid mechanics.
That makes sense.
Less and less is coming out of the riser!
No experience in this field. So please excuse me if I do not have the right lingo. Would not the mass balance indicate that the overall flow from the pumps will have to be equal to or greater than the leak rate out of riser with well flowing plus desired mass displacement rate in the pipe going down in to the well? If that is correct then a good estimate of the leak rate is essential to success. For planning purposes one would want to use a high side estimate of the leak. That means roughly 1000 barrels an hour or 16 barrels a minute. BP’s 50 to 60 barrel per minute rate may be adequate unless the leak rate is much higher in which case junk shot may be necessary.
I remain confused and mystified with all the experts from private and public sector?
[QUOTE=jksoft;33934]I would think that the heavier weight mud would have a higher viscosity therefore require more HP to pump at the same flow rate.[/QUOTE]
I don’t work in the industry either, just a thinker. I agree with all you said, based on viscosity/flow rate as theory, not knowing specifics. But also consider that the [U]heavy mud being forced down the pipe [I]should[/I] [I]diminish flow rate[/I] as it fills the upper portion, offsetting pressure and flow as a denser mass pushes back the upflow[/U]. (aside from pump forces spewing out the top leaks)
Therefore it seems to me that afterward such light mud, then a denser, more viscous material could be pumped immediately in on top of that reduced flow rate produced by stage 1 of a (continuous) 2 or 3-stage pumping process of subsequently heavier more viscous materials, after the flow is reduced by earlier mud.
Pardon me, but I love this forum. Thanks for letting me add 2 cents. To me it does not seem as hoped or as “planned”, likely problems of a seam leak high relatively in the pipe … but I am NOT expert, rather just observing keenly and [I]speculating.[/I]
If they’re pumping through the kill line, into the long string, and we are seeing mud returns at the riser how is the mud getting outside of the long string and back up? What is the expected path? Does this indicate a production pipe or possibly a shoe failure?
[QUOTE=shahhrs;33941]No experience in this field. So please excuse me if I do not have the right lingo. Would not the mass balance indicate that the overall flow from the pumps will have to be equal to or greater than the leak rate out of riser with well flowing plus desired mass displacement rate in the pipe going down in to the well? If that is correct then a good estimate of the leak rate is essential to success. For planning purposes one would want to use a high side estimate of the leak. That means roughly 1000 barrels an hour or 16 barrels a minute. BP’s 50 to 60 barrel per minute rate may be adequate unless the leak rate is much higher in which case junk shot may be necessary.
I remain confused and mystified with all the experts from private and public sector?[/QUOTE]
Welcome to the club. Don’t know how long you been following this thread, but you are fishingin the right hole here.
You sure you aren’t in the business, because you sound pretty sharp on this stuff ?
Boy yall been doing some thinking. I hope the guys in the war room have been thinking like yall. The mud is going down the hole out the casing annulus & coming up through the stack at the same time. They aren’t circulating it they are bullheading it. That is the term used when you pump by force to kill a well.[QUOTE=Bob S;33945]If they’re pumping through the kill line, into the long string, and we are seeing mud returns at the riser how is the mud getting outside of the long string and back up? What is the expected path? Does this indicate a production pipe or possibly a shoe failure?[/QUOTE]