Deepwater Horizon - Transocean Oil Rig Fire

[ExCompanyMan]

Queston: I was surprised, that john Guide lacked the knowledge of the bop <according to his testimony> Is that reasonable ? ExCompMan?

Not too surprised; quite typical of these types of team leaders who did not 'grow up' much on the rigs (don't think he did); personally I think he should have had more knowledge than he seemed to have. Transocean's Drillers, Drilling Supervisors and Night Pushers were probably the only ones with in-depth knowledge of it (and Guide depended on them (and his offshore Team Leaders)).

[AHTS Master]

What's the deal with the Topkill that will start tomorrow ?

[ExCompanyMan]

What's the deal with the Topkill that will start tomorrow ?

Here is the lastest BP update:
http://bp.concerts.com/gom/audio/tec...072010_3pm.htm

[BLISTERS]

Here is the lastest BP update:
http://bp.concerts.com/gom/audio/tec...072010_3pm.htm

Any word from what shut-in pressures are now ? BP are either very brave orfoolish. Doubt even an ass likin BP man like Alcor would support such a move, unless it prevents damage to the reservoir.

[ExCompanyMan]

Any word from what shut-in pressures are now ? BP are either very brave orfoolish. Doubt even an ass likin BP man like Alcor would support such a move, unless it prevents damage to the reservoir.

The well pressure was 6,932 psi on 7/27 and was increasing at less than a half a PSI per hour according to the briefing (did you listen to it or read the transcript?). Also of interest is that they first want the liner set in the relief well and only then start the static top kill; good idea!

The transcript is here:
http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarti...tentId=7063846

[BLISTERS]

The well pressure was 6,932 psi on 7/27 and was increasing at less than a half a PSI per hour according to the briefing (did you listen to it or read the transcript?). Also of interest is that they first want the liner set in the relief well and only then start the static top kill; good idea!

The transcript is here:
http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarti...tentId=7063846

Have not had the opportunity to listen or read transcript, but thanks anyway. Any idea what 's causing the this very slow build up of pressure ? Like if there's a leak ? is it flowing into some other zone until it fills it up completely bit by bit ? I would have expected as per DST trends, for the pressure to build up relatively quickly over several hours to max out but not over several days. Yes, I too think it is a good idea they set liner for the relief well first.

[shahhrs]

I would like to understand what would be the pressure vs time graph look like for a small or a large leak. The graph on bp web site shows an exponential rise of pressure vs time. The graph does not show the initial rise (from appx. 2000 psi ) but starts from appx 6500 psi. They appear to imply that initial rise time was relatively fast.

I assume that the presence of gas in the well bore would give rise to the exponential curve. How would a leak change this graph?
Does a steep rise in pressure indicate:
1. No major flow in the formation and not certainly close to the sea bed?
2. If there was a leak near the sea bed, then higher pressure near the sea bed would have caused significant flow in that area, which will show up as slow rise in pressure at the BOP?
3. Then only possibility, then is of a leak at or near the bottom of the well, where the formation has been at a higher pressure regardless of the leak and thus allowed the pressure at BOP to change relatively fast? and slow rise is only due to gas compression.
Thanks in advance for enlightenment

[ExCompanyMan]

I would like to understand what would be the pressure vs time graph look like for a small or a large leak. The graph on bp web site shows an exponential rise of pressure vs time. The graph does not show the initial rise (from appx. 2000 psi ) but starts from appx 6500 psi. They appear to imply that initial rise time was relatively fast.

I assume that the presence of gas in the well bore would give rise to the exponential curve. How would a leak change this graph?
Does a steep rise in pressure indicate:
1. No major flow in the formation and not certainly close to the sea bed?
2. If there was a leak near the sea bed, then higher pressure near the sea bed would have caused significant flow in that area, which will show up as slow rise in pressure at the BOP?
3. Then only possibility, then is of a leak at or near the bottom of the well, where the formation has been at a higher pressure regardless of the leak and thus allowed the pressure at BOP to change relatively fast? and slow rise is only due to gas compression.
Thanks in advance for enlightenment

I am not a reservoir engineer but the build up is reservoir dependent and has nothing to do whether the leak is small or large or is near the top or near the bottom (note that it is a reverse exponential curve: quick rise initially than slowing drastically down over time).
I tried to find something on the web that explains build up curves for different reservoirs. This is the best I could come up with:
http://www.fekete.com/resources/pape...sts6_paper.pdf

Also from WSJ:
Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen said debris was found in the bottom of the relief well that must be fished out before crews can pump mud into the busted well in a procedure known as a static kill.







"It's not a huge problem, but it has to be removed before we can put the pipe casing (liner) down," Mr. Allen said. The sediment settled there last week when crews installed a plug to keep the well safe ahead of Tropical Storm Bonnie. They found it as they were preparing for the static kill. They had hoped to start the static kill as early as Sunday, but removing the debris will take 24 to 36 hours.

Kent Wells is about to give an update:
http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarti...tentId=7063846

[bigmoose]

Kent Wells July 27th transcript:

Angel Gonzalez: Hi. I was wondering, how do you plan to pump cement or to pump drilling fluid into the well, if you go ahead with the static kill, through exactly which line or which part of the BOP?
Kent Wells: Yes. It'll – it will go down through the drill pipe, which will go through the BOP. And we will be – so the BOP is not really a factor. We'll have that – excuse me, sorry.
We will be pumping the mud through the choke and kill lines on the BOP, the same ones that we used for the top kill, and if you look and you'll see some of the diagrams that are hooked up to the Q4000. Excuse me.
And we will be pumping the mud through that first, monitoring the pressures. We have special gauges on there that can monitor the pressures. And then when we're finished pumping the mud and we get to a decision point, then we'll pump the cement through the same choke and kill lines.

Does this plan bother anyone else besides me? After the static kill, Kent plans to flood the well from the top to the bottom with cement? Is this right? Will this not entomb the BOP and the drill pipe within it? Will it not encase all the BOP rams making sure they cannot cycle anymore? Is this a plan by BP to ensure that the BOP can never be recovered?

If they do this, and let us assume they are successful. Would they not make the case that cutting things up and apart to recover the BOP may "unsettle" the successful cement... and why don't we just let everything be as it is on the bottom of the ocean for all time?

What am I missing?

[New Orleans Lady]

and there the dna evidence, gets buried, as well.

[Alf]

I would like to add a little bit to this, if I may..

I am not a reservoir engineer but the build up is reservoir dependent and has nothing to do whether the leak is small or large or is near the top or near the bottom

I'm not a PE either, but my logic would suggest that...

Wellbore volume is a constant, ie it's known, there's a specific amount of steel and drilled hole etc
A known volume should not take x million days to fill and reach a max psi value should it?
(expeuk.... I think we need your input)

possibilities
a. OK, maybe there is some kind of reservoir effect happening, ie fluids have been drawn-in and flowed unconstrained for 100days from 1000's of feet radially away from the wellbore, and all that humongous reservoir volume that was drained now has to fill up/reach equilibrium again and then pressure stabilise.
yes it's one possibility.

Second possibility is...
b. reservoir has good permeability and porosity, ie it flows like a bast##d. After 100 days and huge amounts of oil, it refills PDQ.
Wellbore volume etc is small by comparison to this huge reservoir, a reservoir which easily settles down and stabilises.
So the speculation goes as follows...
Pressure and fluid is going somewhere else, ie out to other formations via a damaged well bore, hence the painfully slow build up.

Thad Allen said debris was found in the bottom of the relief well that must be fished out

Fishing usually implies metal of some kind. hmmm??? Could he just be using terminology that was "given" to him?

"It's not a huge problem, but it has to be removed before we can put the pipe casing (liner) down," Mr. Allen said. The sediment settled there last week when crews installed a plug to keep the well safe ahead of Tropical Storm Bonnie. They found it as they were preparing for the static kill. They had hoped to start the static kill as early as Sunday, but removing the debris will take 24 to 36 hours.

The use of "debris", and then "sediment"... sounds very much like Mr Allen is being bamboozled with terminology from bp.
To me it sounds like it could be simple "hole fill/cavings etc",
unless of course... someone is deliberately throwing monkey wrenches down the well for sabotage?
It's a possibility, and has been seen many times elsewhere in the world.

I'm speculating too much again!

[Alf]

Kent Wells July 27th transcript:


Does this plan bother anyone else besides me? After the static kill, Kent plans to flood the well from the top to the bottom with cement? Is this right? Will this not entomb the BOP and the drill pipe within it? Will it not encase all the BOP rams making sure they cannot cycle anymore? Is this a plan by BP to ensure that the BOP can never be recovered?

If they do this, and let us assume they are successful. Would they not make the case that cutting things up and apart to recover the BOP may "unsettle" the successful cement... and why don't we just let everything be as it is on the bottom of the ocean for all time?

What am I missing?

I haven't read the "latest & greatest" BS from bp

First. Wells is just a PR man. from what you quote from the briefing, he obviously doesn't know diddley about what is going on.

"we're going to be doing this.."
"excuse me, sorry, I meant we are going to do this.."
"excuse me....."

As for top killing it?
Well they tried this before and gave up because of concerns over high pressures at the BOP which could create problems/damage down in the wellbore.. or words to that effect.

Assuming top kill N0.2 works... what have they achieved? Do they really know that it's killed 100% top to bottom in both annulus and main wellbore? Answer = NO.

Listen to the comments/remarks already made re the relief well, and they plan to "hit" the annulus first and then the main wellbore. So there is doubt about where the actual flowpath is.

Kill it then fill with cement.... that's pretty much guaranteed to put a stop to the relief well. If they plug the top of the well with cement with top kill2, then the relief well can't pump anywhere, it won't have a circulation path, except for maybe bullheading?.

Cementing from top kill2 would fill the BOP with cement for sure.
Could they then unlatch the connector and recover the BOP??????? Doubtful to be able to activate the connector.

I think they might be trying to hide the evidence in a permanent concrete tombstone.

[BLISTERS]

I would like to add a little bit to this, if I may..



I'm not a PE either, but my logic would suggest that...

Wellbore volume is a constant, ie it's known, there's a specific amount of steel and drilled hole etc
A known volume should not take x million days to fill and reach a max psi value should it?
(expeuk.... I think we need your input)

possibilities
a. OK, maybe there is some kind of reservoir effect happening, ie fluids have been drawn-in and flowed unconstrained for 100days from 1000's of feet radially away from the wellbore, and all that humongous reservoir volume that was drained now has to fill up/reach equilibrium again and then pressure stabilise.
yes it's one possibility.

Second possibility is...
b. reservoir has good permeability and porosity, ie it flows like a bast##d. After 100 days and huge amounts of oil, it refills PDQ.
Wellbore volume etc is small by comparison to this huge reservoir, a reservoir which easily settles down and stabilises.
So the speculation goes as follows...
Pressure and fluid is going somewhere else, ie out to other formations via a damaged well bore, hence the painfully slow build up.

Fishing usually implies metal of some kind. hmmm??? Could he just be using terminology that was &quot;given&quot; to him?

The use of &quot;debris&quot;, and then &quot;sediment&quot;... sounds very much like Mr Allen is being bamboozled with terminology from bp.
To me it sounds like it could be simple &quot;hole fill/cavings etc&quot;,
unless of course... someone is deliberately throwing monkey wrenches down the well for sabotage?
It's a possibility, and has been seen many times elsewhere in the world.

I'm speculating too much again!

No doubt Thad's a BP stooge. He keeps saying -we- just to fool Joe Public into thinking he knows what he's talking about. Don't be surprised if one fine day, sometime in the near future, you step on a BP hired rig somewhere on the seven seas and Thad's the companyman, claiming 30 yr oil field experience with photo shopped certificates displayed on the walls of his office. Plain to see this fat guy is not too intelligent. Which is why they chose him for the job.

[Crash Dummy]

No doubt Thad's a BP stooge. He keeps saying -we- just to fool Joe Public into thinking he knows what he's talking about. Don't be surprised if one fine day, sometime in the near future, you step on a BP hired rig somewhere on the seven seas and Thad's the companyman, claiming 30 yr oil field experience with photo shopped certificates displayed on the walls of his office. Plain to see this fat guy is not too intelligent. Which is why they chose him for the job.

Couldn't agree more, meeting with Fat Allen, BP and the Parish Presidents ended with Fatty stating they will give local leaders til Tuesday to come up with plan to continue spill response fight.

If he hasnt gotten fat off this then he's plain out right STUPID, what he needs to do is get the snotty end of BP'S f-stick out of his mouth.

If he were the leader he is being made up to be he wouldn't give the locals a deadline he would have outlined a plan for the future and asked for there input. And then told BP to suck it up instead he is the one sucking it up.

[Alf]

No doubt Thad's a BP stooge. He keeps saying -we- just to fool Joe Public into thinking he knows what he's talking about. Don't be surprised if one fine day, sometime in the near future, you step on a BP hired rig somewhere on the seven seas and Thad's the companyman, claiming 30 yr oil field experience with photo shopped certificates displayed on the walls of his office. Plain to see this fat guy is not too intelligent. Which is why they chose him for the job.

I have a slightly different view, and yes, maybe I'm being somewhat naive here... ?

Admrl (ret) Thad Allen is obviously way, way out of his depth here re his understanding of 'the mechanics of the oilfield and how it works'. That's obvious in the way he reports "technical details".
For this I have some sympathy as he is very reliant upon the bp propaganda machine (Mr Wells, bp PR etc) for his info.

As for bp stooge... well, if you would, just take the above comments into account.

Way back, I joined this "melee of discussions" believing that the USCG were a reasonably professional organisation. I have concerns as to why they appear to be hanging Admrl Thad out to dry?

You don't get to be an Admiral (in my books) without some degree of competence. Or am I wrong, and in fact, any Joe Blow off the street can apply to be an Admiral?

Again I say... am I being too naive?

[New Orleans Lady]

Quite, a few O&G gents < on the other brand X website> like yourselves, are concerned about the well integrity, re hot stab . Rather, risky, from what I ve been reading. I pray it goes "well".

[billslugg]

After the static kill, Kent plans to flood the well from the top to the bottom with cement? Is this right? Will this not entomb the BOP and the drill pipe within it? Will it not encase all the BOP rams making sure they cannot cycle anymore? Is this a plan by BP to ensure that the BOP can never be recovered?

I am not in the oil industry but I can offer some thoughts.

They can do a static kill and cement from the top. In doing so they would "bullhead" the hydrocarbons back into the formation.

They can wait for the relief well and kill and cement it from the bottom. In this case they could vent the hydrocarbons out the choke and kill lines.

In either case, they cannot simply pump slowly. They must pump with some vigor, and get the fluid flowing fast enough that it travels as one mass. This "plug" flow is essential to insuring that the flowing mud cleans the walls of the casing thoroughly. Likewise, the cement cannot flow slowly or it will make channels and not seal well. The higher pressures needed for this plug flow can cause mud and cement to be lost through casing breaches or lost into the formation.

Doing it from the bottom has an advantage in that they can intercept the annulus first, kill and cement it, then pull out of the hole, change to a milling bit, run back in the hole, mill through the 1/2" wall of the 7" production casing then kill and cement it.

Going in from the top has the disadvantage that they might lose mud or cement through a possible breach in the 16" casing induced by the failed dynamic top kill effort.

A bottom kill has the disadvantage that mud and cement can be lost to the formation. There are weak zones all along the uncemented annulus between the 7" production casing and the rock; from the bottom of the 9-7/8" liner at 17,168' measured depth (MD) on down to 18,360' MD.

Going in from the top also has the disadvantage that they only have access to the annulus. (Assuming the 9-7/8" production casing hanger is up in the BOP somewhere.) They have no way to get fluids down the interior of the 9-7/8" production casing when going in from the top.

They cannot leave the BOP down there. A BOP is not an acceptable form of abandonment. They must cement the well until it is dead and then cut off the BOP and remove it and every bit of metal off the sea floor. Anything other than that will require a variance.

[Alf]

Don't be surprised if one fine day, sometime in the near future, you step on a BP hired rig somewhere on the seven seas and Thad's the companyman, claiming 30 yr oil field experience with photo shopped certificates displayed on the walls of his office.

As for Photoshoppin etc...

here's something to look at: a humour moment. (you might need a DivX video codec?)..
http://www.4shared.com/video/-amPrWB_/chimpdivx.html

ps TURN THE VOLUME UP LOUD!

[New Orleans Lady]

Alf, I will find good use for that little present!!

[BLISTERS]

I have a slightly different view, and yes, maybe I'm being somewhat naive here... ?

Admrl (ret) Thad Allen is obviously way, way out of his depth here re his understanding of 'the mechanics of the oilfield and how it works'. That's obvious in the way he reports &quot;technical details&quot;.
For this I have some sympathy as he is very reliant upon the bp propaganda machine (Mr Wells, bp PR etc) for his info.

As for bp stooge... well, if you would, just take the above comments into account.

Way back, I joined this &quot;melee of discussions&quot; believing that the USCG were a reasonably professional organisation. I have concerns as to why they appear to be hanging Admrl Thad out to dry?

You don't get to be an Admiral (in my books) without some degree of competence. Or am I wrong, and in fact, any Joe Blow off the street can apply to be an Admiral?

Again I say... am I being too naive?

I get your point but I think you missed mine. No doubt Thad is experienced with his line of work. And some of it with respect to maritime experience, command, organizational skills, logistics, facing and addressing the public, taking questions from the floor and dealing with the press are most essential with the post he has taken up. He has the right stuff for an Admiral but he is no drilling engineer. Does he have his own independent drilling / petroleum engineering experts at hand for consultation before he babbles the crap BP uploads into his skull ? We all know how someone looks like when he/she talks about a subject that is way out of their depth, and Thad sure does look it when it comes to oilfield engineering. No one i know of, in or out of the the oilfield, trusts anything BP says. It is not wise to parrot stuff as gospel without first cross checking it out with independent experts in that field.