• Welcome to AlpineZone, the largest online community of skiers and snowboarders in the Northeast!

    You may have to REGISTER before you can post. Registering is FREE, gets rid of the majority of advertisements, and lets you participate in giveaways and other AlpineZone events!

The Gulf

Puck it

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 26, 2006
Messages
9,707
Points
48
Location
Franconia, NH
Note to readers: I apologize in advance for the length of this post. I also want to lead off by saying it's completely not aimed at any individual, in particular WakeboardMom. She just happened to have a reasonable post that reminds me just how unreasonable many people can be. The following is not intended to be political. I fully realize that to the engineers among us, the sequence of events is a gross oversimplification. The nitty gritty isn't that important for our purposes. I also realize that I cannot type "the" or "and" accurately regularly.

As I understand it, it's absolutely not a case of this or that alarm not going off. It was an exploration well that they drilled, to see if there were hydrocarbons present. There are, hooray, so you plug the hole up, seal it up tight, and call in a development drilling rig (the one that sank drills 1 hole fast, then moves on. A development rig sits there, drills 5-10 holes, gets the wells hooked up to the pipeline, then moves on. Rinse, repeat). The hole had been cemented, as I understand it, with a plug (think a wine cork) topped by cement, topped by another plug, with a Blow Out Preventer (BOP) on top of that. On top of all that was the riser, which is the pipe that runs from the seabed up through 5,000 feet of water to the platform, typically filled with mud. Imagine how much 5,000 feet of mud in a 12-14 inch pipe weighs- yet another safety check holding the gas and down. Somehow the pressure down in the hole jumped beyond what the plugs and cement could hold (faulty design, a bad pour, a bad read on the pressure, or the engineers weren't familiar with an average Tuesday morning for Marc, it's hard to say), and hydrocarbons worked their way into the riser and up to the platform. Now, the first plug should have held, but it didn't. The cement should have held, but it didn't. The second plug should have held, but it didn't. The BOP should have slammed shut (huge pointy rams jam closed, pinching off the pipe and closing it), but it didn't. The mud in the riser should have held everything down, but it didn't. So, hydrocarbons made it to the platform, and found an ignition source, which, as anyone who's been at Marc's on a Tuesday morning will tell you, it always does. So, boom.

So, what went wrong? Was there mud in the riser, and was it the right mud? Maybe, but they may have been clearing the riser preparing to disconnect. Were the plugs put in wrong? Maybe, but the cement job around the casing (you drill the hole, then put a piece of casing pipe in, then pour cement around that) might have failed, letting everything seep up past the plugs. Did the BOP fail? Maybe- it might not have activated at all, or maybe a plug got jammed back up into it preventing it from closing.

In the end, until it's contained and re-drilled, it's all a guessing game. Maybe it was the crew, maybe it was the cement, maybe it was the BOP, maybe it was the casing, maybe it was some dumbshit bad luck.

The efforts to contain and control the damage have been quite amazing. BP's reaction has actually been great- they stood right up and said "We'll pay for it." I'm sure they'll be going after folks, too, but no cattle egrets are dying waiting for that check to clear.

It's a disaster, sure. It's a shame those 11 crew members lost their lives, absolutely. Could it have been prevented? Maybe, tighter regs, better control, who knows, maybe it could have. The thing is, it's the risk we run. We need the oil and the gas. We want the power and the plastics. We crave all things petroleum. Pure and simple. If you drive a car to your favorite environmental protest wearing your animal friendly plastic Crocs eating your heart healthy tofu imported from China where they know the value of a hard day's work, then step on up and roll the dice at the Deepwater Casino.

There aren't that many choices. Drive, and either destroy the Gulf or fund terrorists, or don't. Or, drive less, spend more to do it, and pay for an alternative. Whatever, don't go lambasting the evil oil executives who are intentionally trying to destroy the environment.Throw a little of that blame around, splash a little on the NIMBYs and BANANAs. Give a cup to SoccerMom, and a jigger to...okay, I don't have a male equivalent to SoccerMom. Because the engineers will figure out a way to keep this from happening again, just like they'll figure out a way to keep the next bad thing from happening again, and the next bad thing after that. And some day, we'll decide the price is too high. Whether it's at the gas pump, or at the grocery store, or at the tarmac wasteland that used to be a beach. And then, maybe, just maybe, we'll do something useful about it.

I thought I read that the drilling mud was in place only sea water. I do not remember where I saw this. This could expalin the the plugs failing.
 

Warp Daddy

Active member
Joined
Jan 12, 2006
Messages
8,000
Points
38
Location
NNY St Lawrence River
C-10 well done

You have analytically described in layman's terms that the complexity and ultimate repair of the failure is akin to peeling back the layers of the problem like an onion until SOMETHING works .

Many of us do not comprehend the whys and wherefores of various design elements for control systems that are /were in place and continue to fail and as a result grow weary of the seemingly stultifying pace of problem resolution --------------Not saying i agree with that but right or wrong that's HUMAN Nature and expecting systemic behavioral modification relative to lifestyle choices within a society that is self centered is a Pipedream ( No Pun intended )

Thanks again for 'splainin it to us rubes
 

ctenidae

Active member
Joined
Nov 11, 2004
Messages
8,959
Points
38
Location
SW Connecticut
I thought I read that the drilling mud was in place only sea water. I do not remember where I saw this. This could expalin the the plugs failing.

Yeah, apparently they were pulling the mud and replacing it with seawater, a normal step prior to disconnection. Issue seems to be that the cement wasn't good, and couldn't hold wihtout the mud on top. BP's looking worse and worse in all of it, as it seems they did whatever they could to cut a day or two off the time the rig was on site. Not, in and of itself, a bad thing, but therer are some corners that shouldn't be cut.
 

Puck it

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 26, 2006
Messages
9,707
Points
48
Location
Franconia, NH
Yeah, apparently they were pulling the mud and replacing it with seawater, a normal step prior to disconnection. Issue seems to be that the cement wasn't good, and couldn't hold wihtout the mud on top. BP's looking worse and worse in all of it, as it seems they did whatever they could to cut a day or two off the time the rig was on site. Not, in and of itself, a bad thing, but therer are some corners that shouldn't be cut.

Agreed. The number of catatrophic failures seems to high, but two of them may have been human induced leaving the BOP as the loan mechanical failure.
 

drjeff

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 18, 2006
Messages
19,455
Points
113
Location
Brooklyn, CT
C-10 well done

You have analytically described in layman's terms that the complexity and ultimate repair of the failure is akin to peeling back the layers of the problem like an onion until SOMETHING works .

Many of us do not comprehend the whys and wherefores of various design elements for control systems that are /were in place and continue to fail and as a result grow weary of the seemingly stultifying pace of problem resolution --------------Not saying i agree with that but right or wrong that's HUMAN Nature and expecting systemic behavioral modification relative to lifestyle choices within a society that is self centered is a Pipedream ( No Pun intended )

Thanks again for 'splainin it to us rubes

Yup, good explanation to say the least by c-ten!

I think the "best" way I've heard in an attempt to explain now why capping this sucker is so tough (aside from being about a mile below the surface) is from a mechanical engineering prof they were interviewing on TV who described it in the following way (paraphrasing here) - it's easy to screw a sprayer onto the end of a garden hose when the water isn't flowing through the hose, now try and do the same thing when the water is flowing though the hose - much tougher, and now have that hose be 14" in diameter :eek:
 

ctenidae

Active member
Joined
Nov 11, 2004
Messages
8,959
Points
38
Location
SW Connecticut
Yup, good explanation to say the least by c-ten!

I think the "best" way I've heard in an attempt to explain now why capping this sucker is so tough (aside from being about a mile below the surface) is from a mechanical engineering prof they were interviewing on TV who described it in the following way (paraphrasing here) - it's easy to screw a sprayer onto the end of a garden hose when the water isn't flowing through the hose, now try and do the same thing when the water is flowing though the hose - much tougher, and now have that hose be 14" in diameter :eek:

And a mile underwater, with 3,500 psi pushing through.
Yeah, not easy.
 

Warp Daddy

Active member
Joined
Jan 12, 2006
Messages
8,000
Points
38
Location
NNY St Lawrence River
Yup, good explanation to say the least by c-ten!

I think the "best" way I've heard in an attempt to explain now why capping this sucker is so tough (aside from being about a mile below the surface) is from a mechanical engineering prof they were interviewing on TV who described it in the following way (paraphrasing here) - it's easy to screw a sprayer onto the end of a garden hose when the water isn't flowing through the hose, now try and do the same thing when the water is flowing though the hose - much tougher, and now have that hose be 14" in diameter :eek:

point well taken doc !
 

smitty77

New member
Joined
Aug 8, 2003
Messages
654
Points
0
Location
Athol, MA
Website
hotmix77.tripod.com
BP's looking worse and worse in all of it, as it seems they did whatever they could to cut a day or two off the time the rig was on site. Not, in and of itself, a bad thing, but therer are some corners that shouldn't be cut.

I found a nice article explaining things much the way you did, but with some insight into why some corners were cut along with a detailed description of the problems faced when drilling wells in the layered, crusty Gulf seabed.

Not that I condone cutting corners, but this is a business after all, whose sole purpose is to provide a service in exchange for money. This is why we have regulatory agencies like the Minerals Management Service who, IMO, should share a huge portion of the blame for this mess. You cannot expect a corporation to police itself, and the watchdog was protecting the wrong people.

Here's another article on the inexact science of capping a well.

And another sobering thought courtesy of Brian Willimas:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/#37457132

At about 20 seconds into the video: "The sad truth is, if you added up all the oil that's spilled out into the Gulf from this, the millions and millions of gallons, it equals only about an hours worth of our nations energy consumption where oil is concerned."

43 days of a well head gushing uncontrollably equals 1 HOUR of our nation's oil demand. Sickening.... If we're looking for someone/something to blame, we all need to take a good long look in the mirror. BP and companies just like them are not in the Gulf just for fun.
 

ctenidae

Active member
Joined
Nov 11, 2004
Messages
8,959
Points
38
Location
SW Connecticut
That's a pretty good article. Not sure I entirely agree with BP's definition of "not uncommon," but that's neither her nor there.

Main reason for cutting corners: $533,000 a day for the rig to be on station.
 

Marc

New member
Joined
Sep 12, 2005
Messages
7,526
Points
0
Location
Dudley, MA
Website
www.marcpmc.com
That's a pretty good article. Not sure I entirely agree with BP's definition of "not uncommon," but that's neither her nor there.

Main reason for cutting corners: $533,000 a day for the rig to be on station.

I think they might review the risk v. reward analysis on that decision.
 

ctenidae

Active member
Joined
Nov 11, 2004
Messages
8,959
Points
38
Location
SW Connecticut
I think they might review the risk v. reward analysis on that decision.

Probably- Save $7 million vs risk $500 billion.

hmmmm...

It is interesting that there are so few rigs drilling in the Gulf now compared to even just 5 years ago- it's just too expensive to do. We talk about the profits the oil companies bring in, and the dollar amounts are huge, but the margin's only 4-6%. Doesn't take a very big "oops" to take a big chunk out of a 6% margin.
 

dmc

New member
Joined
Oct 28, 2004
Messages
14,275
Points
0
Love this one...
30632_395730804645_670784645_4408621_6761502_n.jpg
 

SKIQUATTRO

New member
Joined
Oct 28, 2005
Messages
3,232
Points
0
Location
LI, NY
wondering where the benefit concerts are...when the earthquakes in haiti happened, the celebrieties were everywhere raising money, where are they now for the people of the Gulf?
 

riverc0il

New member
Joined
Jul 10, 2001
Messages
13,039
Points
0
Location
Ashland, NH
Website
www.thesnowway.com
Everyone is really dumping on BP lately. I have to ask the question: why BP? Does any one really think any other energy company could have done a better job with this? I find that hard to believe. If people want to be outraged, they should look in the mirror first. Then.... well, then it gets political so I will leave it at that.
 

deadheadskier

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
28,416
Points
113
Location
Southeast NH
I don't think that's a fair argument. Who knows if other oil companies have better safe guards against what caused this mess. BP workers on the rig say that the company cut a lot of corners. I'm not saying I trust their word as scripture, but it does give me pause.

We can point the finger inward all we want and say it's each and every one of our addiction to oil that is the problem. That fact doesn't change who ultimately is responsible for this disaster. It's BP and the other companies contracted for that rigs operation. I don't even really like to point fingers at the regulators. Sure tougher regulations could have been in place, but BP shouldn't have to be told what's the right way to operate. They're experts and should be doing it right.

Exxon took theirs 20 years ago. BP deserves theirs now.
 

JimG.

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Oct 29, 2004
Messages
12,138
Points
113
Location
Hopewell Jct., NY
Everyone is really dumping on BP lately. I have to ask the question: why BP? Does any one really think any other energy company could have done a better job with this? I find that hard to believe. If people want to be outraged, they should look in the mirror first. Then.... well, then it gets political so I will leave it at that.

Why BP?

Why not...it was their rig that blew up. And people need a "face" to confront with their anger.

Anger that is well earned...this event has ruined an entire region's economy at a time it is ill afforded. We have not felt the repercussions here...yet.

That's why in a nutshell. I understand what you mean about looking in the mirror, but it is too easy to say I don't own any oil rigs. It is too simplistic to lay blame on the users of the product...akin to blaming those who drink alcohol responsibly for deaths caused by drunk driving.

As you did, I will stop now before I really get going.
 

Warp Daddy

Active member
Joined
Jan 12, 2006
Messages
8,000
Points
38
Location
NNY St Lawrence River
BP simply bcuz they Efeed up royally and let greed take precedent in their decision to override safety precaution vs profit -- sorry they are richly deserving of the pr shitstorm .
 
Top