BP's Deepwater Oil Spill - How to Deal with a Dead Well - and Open Thread
Posted by Heading Out on August 14, 2010 - 10:30am
Topic: Environment/Sustainability
Tags: deepwater horizon, oil spill [list all tags]
Topic: Environment/Sustainability
Tags: deepwater horizon, oil spill [list all tags]
The Admiral confirmed, in his Friday press conference, that the negative pressure test on the Deepwater well held steady for 24-hours without any inflow of fluid into the well, or increase in pressure. That means that there is sufficient cement in the annulus to block a free passage from the reservoir, through the annulus, to the well head. In other words the well is killed. The problem now becomes something different.
As I mentioned yesterday the central section of the well, inside the production casing, is full of cement. The only path possibly available is up the annulus, above the bottom section where cement has filled it. The problem that is now faced is that no-one knows how much of the cement in the annulus was there from the original cementing of the production casing into place, and how much from the injection of cement during the static kill. If it is a relatively small amount, then there is a risk that this barrier may fail, with time, and oil under reservoir pressure can then flow up the annulus to the well head. And to help with the discussion, here is the picture that I have used before to illustrate the situation.
As I mentioned yesterday the central section of the well, inside the production casing, is full of cement. The only path possibly available is up the annulus, above the bottom section where cement has filled it. The problem that is now faced is that no-one knows how much of the cement in the annulus was there from the original cementing of the production casing into place, and how much from the injection of cement during the static kill. If it is a relatively small amount, then there is a risk that this barrier may fail, with time, and oil under reservoir pressure can then flow up the annulus to the well head. And to help with the discussion, here is the picture that I have used before to illustrate the situation.
I would suspect that it is a relatively thick barrier – the original injection of cement into the well from the production casing was, if my memory serves, about half that required to fill the annulus to the previous cement lining injection. Given that this is 800 ft above the bottom of the well, then there is 400 ft of cement above the shoe in the annulus.
In a relatively close to surface operation, the flow of fluid across the bottom of that column might induce enough cavitation to eat back the cement by about 20-ft or more (Glen Canyon Dam, and Tarbela High Dam for eg) but with the back pressures in the well that would suppress cavitation, I don’t anticipate that there was that much erosion out of the flow path of the oil and gas to the bottom of the well. There could be enough erosion along the contact with the overlying sandstone, which would erode out the column over the height of the sandstone, (say 60 ft) but even with that there is likely at least a couple of hundred feet of cement in the annulus above the reservoir creating a seal.
But that leaves the problem of the up to 1,000 barrels of oil that may be trapped in the annulus, begging the question as to how it is supposed to have got there if the cement in the annulus retained its integrity above the reservoir.
To determine if that is oil, which would imply that the above supposition was wrong and that the well had no cement integrity in the annulus until the cement from the static kill provided some, the relief well has to intersect the original well. When it does so it raises two problems, only one of which I mentioned in the last post.
The one I mentioned is that with a cement plug in the annulus below the intersection if BP start to inject fluid into the annulus they don’t have an easy way of displacing the fluid already there. There is nowhere to push it, and no clear way to circulate it out with the relief well configuration. The logical path to push it upwards out of the well runs into a slight problem that the Admiral introduced today, which is that the part between the new stack and the old BOP (the spooling tool) is only rated to 7,500 psi. And there is no simple path for fluid to flow from the annulus up through the existing hardware on top of the rig into a pipe that could carry it to a vessel at the surface.
The one that I did not mention was that if the original cement has been removed over the full column of the annulus down at the bottom of the well, and only replaced by the cement injected during the static kill, then there is no way of knowing how thick that barrier is. Raising the pressure in the annulus to inject cement into it from the relief well could break that barrier (though it would also provide a path for oil in the well to displace downwards back into the reservoir and thus dispose of maybe 10% of the oil in the annulus., which still leaves the question as to how to displace the rest.
On the other hand if the relief well goes into the annulus and finds nothing but mud (from the pre-cement days when the production casing was installed) then the question becomes moot.
In a relatively close to surface operation, the flow of fluid across the bottom of that column might induce enough cavitation to eat back the cement by about 20-ft or more (Glen Canyon Dam, and Tarbela High Dam for eg) but with the back pressures in the well that would suppress cavitation, I don’t anticipate that there was that much erosion out of the flow path of the oil and gas to the bottom of the well. There could be enough erosion along the contact with the overlying sandstone, which would erode out the column over the height of the sandstone, (say 60 ft) but even with that there is likely at least a couple of hundred feet of cement in the annulus above the reservoir creating a seal.
But that leaves the problem of the up to 1,000 barrels of oil that may be trapped in the annulus, begging the question as to how it is supposed to have got there if the cement in the annulus retained its integrity above the reservoir.
To determine if that is oil, which would imply that the above supposition was wrong and that the well had no cement integrity in the annulus until the cement from the static kill provided some, the relief well has to intersect the original well. When it does so it raises two problems, only one of which I mentioned in the last post.
The one I mentioned is that with a cement plug in the annulus below the intersection if BP start to inject fluid into the annulus they don’t have an easy way of displacing the fluid already there. There is nowhere to push it, and no clear way to circulate it out with the relief well configuration. The logical path to push it upwards out of the well runs into a slight problem that the Admiral introduced today, which is that the part between the new stack and the old BOP (the spooling tool) is only rated to 7,500 psi. And there is no simple path for fluid to flow from the annulus up through the existing hardware on top of the rig into a pipe that could carry it to a vessel at the surface.
The one that I did not mention was that if the original cement has been removed over the full column of the annulus down at the bottom of the well, and only replaced by the cement injected during the static kill, then there is no way of knowing how thick that barrier is. Raising the pressure in the annulus to inject cement into it from the relief well could break that barrier (though it would also provide a path for oil in the well to displace downwards back into the reservoir and thus dispose of maybe 10% of the oil in the annulus., which still leaves the question as to how to displace the rest.
On the other hand if the relief well goes into the annulus and finds nothing but mud (from the pre-cement days when the production casing was installed) then the question becomes moot.
104 comments on BP's Deepwater Oil Spill - How to Deal with a Dead Well - and Open Thread
You must log in to post a comment. If you don't have an account, create one.
| Show without comments | PDF version
![[-]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_vIrGOSIF39hYN6xYh8sQQQh5ySviDTYwoWUZO8AEWqsAEYlUMpgAaE8hdIne7CHHLrqPuW3UkJEH-EDvd2mpeqPchx90_mQs-GELL7VjQ2VYzLNLAnc74=s0-d)
Says it all:
Return Of The BP Zombie Well
by Fintan Dunne, 14 August 2010 00:35amEST
http://fintandunne.blogspot.com/2010/08/return-of-bp-zombie-well.html
Return Of The BP Zombie Well
by Fintan Dunne, 14 August 2010 00:35amEST
http://fintandunne.blogspot.com/2010/08/return-of-bp-zombie-well.html
It must be BP's relentless lying during the whole of this sorry episode that inclines me to believe Tom Breen and not Thad Allen.Fine - you are using an incorrect news report based on Thad's briefing which you admit is not supported by what Allen actually said. But the incorrect report of what was said must be correct in your mind and Allen is lying.
Allen is getting more and more difficult to understand. It seems like he is trying to be vague--not to lie exactly, but not to tell the whole truth either, IMHO.
More like he is trying to dumb it down. When he doesn't give the version for dummies he gets asked to explain it over and over about 50 times.
Yeah, well. They still don't get it right.
Straw man. As in "A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position."
Next?
Next?
The question is who is the strawman, cavnar or allen
Allen has never stated that the well is "dead" and that's the launch point for the entire pantsload. "Cheap parlor trick" would have done as well as "straw man".
Wasting your time blogwhoring around here, Brother Dunne. Everybody sees right through you.
A few days ago the blog headline was "Oil Surging from Ocean Floor". The latest post is simply a continuation of the flimflam.
"Oil industry veteran, Bob Cavnar was scathing in a comment on Daily Kos: "They risked completely uncontrolled flow to get it off the television."
Here's what Cavnar means"...
"Dang me. This sucker is over. Why can I do to keep my mug showing up on Olbermann's show until my book comes out?"
Here's what Cavnar means"...
"Dang me. This sucker is over. Why can I do to keep my mug showing up on Olbermann's show until my book comes out?"
I believe you have quite correctly assessed the Cavner contribution.
Is it the transition spool or the original flex joint that has the 7500 psi limit?
Morning jinn. Thanks for your comments, on the now closed thread, re my question about the capping stack. (Thanks also to rf73b, Acornus, Unconformity.)
If I can follow up ... Admiral Allen clearly said the transition spool (twice) in yesterday's briefing. He is prone to making errors, I know, but that is the equipment he referred to.
BTW You mentioned that they had absolutely no idea initially that they would shut the stack in but that's not what BP said their plans were. This is from their site:
>>Installing the sealing cap involves a multiple stage process with several vessels and remotely operated vehicles over an approximate 4-7 day period. The sealing cap has the potential to increase oil and gas collection capacity and should improve collection efficiency during hurricane season by allowing shorter disconnect and reconnect times. The new cap assembly should have a positive impact on future well kill and cementing procedures that will be part of the relief well operations. In addition, the new cap should enable testing of well integrity and, depending on pressure measurements, may be used to shut in the well.<<
So it seems that shutting the well in was in the back of their mind. And while I understand what you said about them being able to reopen the choke if pressures were in the 8000-9000 range that doesn't sound like a prudent engineering decision. It would not seem wise to chance overpressuring a piece of equipment. Besides ... if they did hit 8000-9000 how could they close the well in and move offsite in a hurricane? I thought that was the plan.
Dunno really. I am just asking questions because I don't get what's going on and something doesn't seem right to me. Thanks.
EDIT: Oops. I'll answer my own question regarding hurricanes. They wouldn't have shut the well ... they would disconnect and let the well flow and hopefully flowing pressure wouldn't exceed the 7500 PSI.
If I can follow up ... Admiral Allen clearly said the transition spool (twice) in yesterday's briefing. He is prone to making errors, I know, but that is the equipment he referred to.
BTW You mentioned that they had absolutely no idea initially that they would shut the stack in but that's not what BP said their plans were. This is from their site:
>>Installing the sealing cap involves a multiple stage process with several vessels and remotely operated vehicles over an approximate 4-7 day period. The sealing cap has the potential to increase oil and gas collection capacity and should improve collection efficiency during hurricane season by allowing shorter disconnect and reconnect times. The new cap assembly should have a positive impact on future well kill and cementing procedures that will be part of the relief well operations. In addition, the new cap should enable testing of well integrity and, depending on pressure measurements, may be used to shut in the well.<<
So it seems that shutting the well in was in the back of their mind. And while I understand what you said about them being able to reopen the choke if pressures were in the 8000-9000 range that doesn't sound like a prudent engineering decision. It would not seem wise to chance overpressuring a piece of equipment. Besides ... if they did hit 8000-9000 how could they close the well in and move offsite in a hurricane? I thought that was the plan.
Dunno really. I am just asking questions because I don't get what's going on and something doesn't seem right to me. Thanks.
EDIT: Oops. I'll answer my own question regarding hurricanes. They wouldn't have shut the well ... they would disconnect and let the well flow and hopefully flowing pressure wouldn't exceed the 7500 PSI.
I don't think Allen said specifically the spool had that pressure rating. It sounded more like he was saying that limit came into play at the time they added the spool. At any rate I doubt the spool has that limit. The flex joint is supposed to be good to 15k psi in the straight position. In the fully flexed position it's pressure limits are considerably lower. A spool like that is often used at the wellhead and would typically would be rated above the 15k that the BOP sitting on top of it would be rated at.
The closing of the capping stack was to be accompanied by very close monitoring of pressure as they closed it in. The expectation was that they would be opening the valves within hours or days depending on the pressure they found. The actual pressure they found was actually just normal pressure. The one thing they very clearly didn't anticipate was a normal pressure reading.
If the pressure had been higher than the safe limit (now pegged at 7500 psi) then it would still allow them to throttle the flow to stay below the limit and collect whatever oil they couldn't shut in.
The closing of the capping stack was to be accompanied by very close monitoring of pressure as they closed it in. The expectation was that they would be opening the valves within hours or days depending on the pressure they found. The actual pressure they found was actually just normal pressure. The one thing they very clearly didn't anticipate was a normal pressure reading.
If the pressure had been higher than the safe limit (now pegged at 7500 psi) then it would still allow them to throttle the flow to stay below the limit and collect whatever oil they couldn't shut in.
These were Allen's exact words as to the location and rating of the equipment in question:
>>Between the BOP of the deepwater horizon and a capping stack, if you’ll remember, we installed something called a spooling tool where we unbolted the phalange from the riser pipe. We put that piece in and then we connected the new capping stack to it. The threshold of pressure that that can stand is 7500 psi. So that is the weak link in the mechanical chain that connects the legacy blow out preventer to the capping stack.<<
>>Between the BOP of the deepwater horizon and a capping stack, if you’ll remember, we installed something called a spooling tool where we unbolted the phalange from the riser pipe. We put that piece in and then we connected the new capping stack to it. The threshold of pressure that that can stand is 7500 psi. So that is the weak link in the mechanical chain that connects the legacy blow out preventer to the capping stack.<<
yes I read that also. My interpretation is the weak link is the flex joint.
I also like the "phalanges" that the speech to text software creates.
I also like the "phalanges" that the speech to text software creates.
LOL A phalange by any other name ...
I also like the "phalanges" that the speech to text software creates.
No biggie, but it's very unlikely it's speech-to-text software rather than just poor transcription by a human. If it were the former, you'd see many more and much worse errors from audio recorded in that environment with multiple speakers.
Edit: Also, some words that a human transcriber might stumble over would be more likely to be rendered correctly by software. Software should be able to detect that "flanges" was two syllables and wouldn't translate it as the three-syllable word "phalanges" (which is an obscure alternate spelling of "phalanxes" and likely wouldn't even be in its dictionary). The human transcriber unfamiliar with the word "flanges" is trying to give a phonetic approximation of what they're hearing without recourse to a dictionary and probably without noticing the difference in the number of syllables.
What's really annoying is that they can't take 30 minutes to have someone with English skills who knows the terminology go over the transcripts before they're posted. Maybe they need to put them up right away, but they should then post a revised edited version ASAP.
No biggie, but it's very unlikely it's speech-to-text software rather than just poor transcription by a human. If it were the former, you'd see many more and much worse errors from audio recorded in that environment with multiple speakers.
Edit: Also, some words that a human transcriber might stumble over would be more likely to be rendered correctly by software. Software should be able to detect that "flanges" was two syllables and wouldn't translate it as the three-syllable word "phalanges" (which is an obscure alternate spelling of "phalanxes" and likely wouldn't even be in its dictionary). The human transcriber unfamiliar with the word "flanges" is trying to give a phonetic approximation of what they're hearing without recourse to a dictionary and probably without noticing the difference in the number of syllables.
What's really annoying is that they can't take 30 minutes to have someone with English skills who knows the terminology go over the transcripts before they're posted. Maybe they need to put them up right away, but they should then post a revised edited version ASAP.
The Transition Spool Thad talked about is above the flex joint.
It had to made quite thin because there were two pipes sticking out from the BOP and the transition spool had to fit over them.
Therefore it is not astonishing that it is rated relatively low. But still - from an engineering standpoint the thickness of such a spool may not be the real relevant points - when such things rupture it is usually at a welding point. I'd trust that all the welding on this has been x-rayed and will be better than specs. So I wouldn't expect anything happen to the spool until some 10,000psi plus differential pressure between outside ambient pressure and inside pressure is applied.
It had to made quite thin because there were two pipes sticking out from the BOP and the transition spool had to fit over them.
Therefore it is not astonishing that it is rated relatively low. But still - from an engineering standpoint the thickness of such a spool may not be the real relevant points - when such things rupture it is usually at a welding point. I'd trust that all the welding on this has been x-rayed and will be better than specs. So I wouldn't expect anything happen to the spool until some 10,000psi plus differential pressure between outside ambient pressure and inside pressure is applied.
>>So I wouldn't expect anything happen to the spool until some 10,000psi plus differential pressure between outside ambient pressure and inside pressure is applied.<<
I'm sure that is probable but it makes me wonder why Thad Allen is so concerned about it now. He is talking about the possibility of delays while they find ways to mitigate this risk.
>>We’re not ruling out anything at this point. It could be anything from accepting the risk and understand that we may not raise the hanger and then understanding how we – it would be possible to put something on to bleed off the pressure on the top. We could even put another blow out preventer on because we have sealed the well at this point. That would take a longer period of time and so we’re kind of walking through the risks and the time elements associated with that.<<
I'm sure that is probable but it makes me wonder why Thad Allen is so concerned about it now. He is talking about the possibility of delays while they find ways to mitigate this risk.
>>We’re not ruling out anything at this point. It could be anything from accepting the risk and understand that we may not raise the hanger and then understanding how we – it would be possible to put something on to bleed off the pressure on the top. We could even put another blow out preventer on because we have sealed the well at this point. That would take a longer period of time and so we’re kind of walking through the risks and the time elements associated with that.<<
That's an easy one. Before they had nothing to lose. They had a gusher. If something gave out while closing the cap they would still just have the same gusher. Now they don't want to lose any ground that they have gained. They have multiple barriers they don't want to regress and lose one.
It had to made quite thin because there were two pipes sticking out from the BOP and the transition spool had to fit over them.
The ID of the spool is the same regardless of the 2 pipes. The only thing they did to accommodate the 2 pipes was to cut the tube that has the sealing rings at an angle and call that a "mule shoe".
The ID of the spool is the same regardless of the 2 pipes. The only thing they did to accommodate the 2 pipes was to cut the tube that has the sealing rings at an angle and call that a "mule shoe".
>>It had to made quite thin because there were two pipes sticking out from the BOP and the transition spool had to fit over them. <<
The spool tube is supporting 80 + tons of weight. It's not "quite thin."
The spool tube is supporting 80 + tons of weight. It's not "quite thin."
A 15,000 psi rated tube would have been thicker.
With the pressure levels and the other equipment in the bop stack we are talking here, a 7500psi rated tube IS "quite thin".
Engineering is relative ...
With the pressure levels and the other equipment in the bop stack we are talking here, a 7500psi rated tube IS "quite thin".
Engineering is relative ...
It just gets ever more confusing, the HC Collet connector is rated at 15,000 psi and given that the external seawater pressure is 2,300psi then we are talking at least 17,000 psi safe internal pressure at this depth.
http://www.coopercameron.com/content/products/product_detail.cfm?pid=280...
Just about every press conference the maximum pressures at the cap are lowered and no explanation why for is ever given and never asked for by the "media".
http://www.coopercameron.com/content/products/product_detail.cfm?pid=280...
Just about every press conference the maximum pressures at the cap are lowered and no explanation why for is ever given and never asked for by the "media".
The cap and everything that was installed around July 15 is rated to 15K as far as anything I have ever heard. It is the LMRP pressure capability that they installed the cap on top of that has always been a question mark.
As I understand it that particular model flex joint is rated at 15 Kpsi when it is straight. When it is flexed to the maximum 10 degree inclination it is only rated to 5 Kpsi. After the riser was cut off the flex joint was found to be permanently bent at some angle. I have heard differing amounts (3-12 degrees). They straightened the flex joint with jacks before installing the cap, but there is still the question of how much pressure can it stand.
As I understand it that particular model flex joint is rated at 15 Kpsi when it is straight. When it is flexed to the maximum 10 degree inclination it is only rated to 5 Kpsi. After the riser was cut off the flex joint was found to be permanently bent at some angle. I have heard differing amounts (3-12 degrees). They straightened the flex joint with jacks before installing the cap, but there is still the question of how much pressure can it stand.
The graphics showing the drill string etc. really suck. They pretty much have all along. Sorry. It looks like somebody is trying to use "paint" or some such primitive drawing program to do what should be done in a CAD program. Over the years, I have met a huge number of geologists and engineers who can't draft their own figgers or maps - or who just won't try to learn. ~:)
is the shroud of Turin in there.....?
is the shroud of Turin in there.....?
http://blog.al.com/live/2010/08/oil_washes_up_on_baldwin_count.html
"In a Thursday morning e-mail to local government leaders, a U.S. Coast Guard official acknowledged that what had washed up was being classified as subsurface oil -- something that cleanup officials have been slow to acknowledge."
"In a Thursday morning e-mail to local government leaders, a U.S. Coast Guard official acknowledged that what had washed up was being classified as subsurface oil -- something that cleanup officials have been slow to acknowledge."
Slow to acknowledge? You mean like Saddam slow to realize (avoided the Hitler reference)? I swear our government could screw up an anvil. I would not trust the Feds to successfully fire a potato gun.
Edit= Would scale, cross hatches, and engineering fonts made you feel better? Blueline maybe?
Edit= Would scale, cross hatches, and engineering fonts made you feel better? Blueline maybe?
Maybe you should ask for your money back. Nobody has seen the bottom of the well - so any picture of it isn't going to be perfectly accurate no matter how it is made.
It is a matter of time - I can do something this simple, that helps me illustrate the points I want to make in a short time, or spend some considerable amount more time in making a higher quality product, but at the cost of other activities. On the basis that what I generate provides enough information to illustrate the point that I am trying to make, I made a choice. The problem is possibly the textures that I am using, which don't give the contrast that would help, but the model is actually a 3-D one - I just photoshopped it to illustrate changing conditions, and used default textures for the steel and cement - being too lazy to generate my own.
No problem - just an observation. We're all short of time 'round here....
Heading Out, seems like a good time to express my gratitude for your graphics; I find them incredibly helpful. Your graphics work and writing are very much appreciated!
I second that, the quality of writing and graphics on the lead articles are outstanding. Improving the contrast in the graphics would make them even better.
Heading Out, You don't need to be apologizing to anyone on this site. If they can't understand what you put out, making it prettier isn't going to help them, they need a lot more basic studying on the subjects. IMHO
+100
I agree, this is way out of my realm of what I understand, but HO post in a way that even I understand (in other words, he explains it in a way that a 10yr old could understand) if they have done any research/studying on the subject!
I agree, this is way out of my realm of what I understand, but HO post in a way that even I understand (in other words, he explains it in a way that a 10yr old could understand) if they have done any research/studying on the subject!
held steady for 24-hours
Most sources incl BP say "ambient pressure test" was 4 hours, not 24. I still do not like the wiggle room in ambient pressure which could mean anything, coupled with Allen's characterization of depreciable [appreciable] change of pressure. Rockman supposed they displaced the riser to seawater, which I doubt. Certainly they turned off the mud pump. So, did it gain or lose mud? How much? Reminds me of the sloppy negative test on DWH.
Another poster mentioned the conundrum of 7500 psi rating in flex joint or capping spool, which mocks the 8000-9000 psi hoped for when they shut in the well three weeks ago.
Above all, I think it's weird that BP won't show us the wellhead or BOP stack, and multiple ROV obssession with seafloor environment (ostensibly amphipoda) makes me wonder what exactly is being monitored and why. The sonar scan label is wearing thin, because ROVs with that cover story have been pointed at manifold hardware and (as I understand it) sonar only detects heavy oil and asphalt.
Again, the critical datapoint is whether they are pumping mud again.
Most sources incl BP say "ambient pressure test" was 4 hours, not 24. I still do not like the wiggle room in ambient pressure which could mean anything, coupled with Allen's characterization of depreciable [appreciable] change of pressure. Rockman supposed they displaced the riser to seawater, which I doubt. Certainly they turned off the mud pump. So, did it gain or lose mud? How much? Reminds me of the sloppy negative test on DWH.
Another poster mentioned the conundrum of 7500 psi rating in flex joint or capping spool, which mocks the 8000-9000 psi hoped for when they shut in the well three weeks ago.
Above all, I think it's weird that BP won't show us the wellhead or BOP stack, and multiple ROV obssession with seafloor environment (ostensibly amphipoda) makes me wonder what exactly is being monitored and why. The sonar scan label is wearing thin, because ROVs with that cover story have been pointed at manifold hardware and (as I understand it) sonar only detects heavy oil and asphalt.
Again, the critical datapoint is whether they are pumping mud again.
Rockman supposed they displaced the riser to seawater, which I doubtThey could of tested by shutting the valve on the manifold on the seafloor, isolating the 5,000 ft of mud head, and cracking the choke on the upper BOP to bleed the pressure. Then shut the choke an look for pressure build.
Thanks, Rio. I must be dense. Bleed pressure and watch it build again tests what?
Maybe to be clear I should say, that you keep valve on manifold closed. If you have a pressure build it is coming from down hole indicating the well is not sealed. After the test they can just open the valve and reintroduce the 5,000 of mud head.
I doubt they just bled off the pressure into the gulf. There was a reference to hooking up some special equipment to lower pressure. I suspect they would want an accurate accounting of how much mud would be removed (and how much added back to restore pressure)
Maybe not, but my process of bleeding the pressure from about 3400 psi to about 2300 Psi might only take a few gallons.
"I still do not like the wiggle room in ambient pressure"
You don't like anything except yourself.
You don't like anything except yourself.
Okay, fine. Ad hom works.
What have you liked during this journey? That's why you've put yerself in the position of having to say, "Glad to write a full retraction and public apology to BP, just as soon as they detach and recover the old BOP. Meanwhile, what's this new chemical injection apparatus for?
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6846#comment-700784
Well, you actually didn't have to say that. If you follow thru, you'll be a real mensch.
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6846#comment-700784
Well, you actually didn't have to say that. If you follow thru, you'll be a real mensch.
No problem. If they detach and recover the BOP, my career is kaput. I've followed Macondo since April 20. Made incorrect interpretations of ROV pictures. I still believe BP is in trouble. Let's see what happens next.
I know BP is in trouble.
Look at this as an opportunity. If you're not gonna take up a career in building a peak oil homestead (it really is a career; ask Todd http://www.theoildrum.com/node/4979 ), take a look at health care. I'd say respiratory therapy, but I think nurses may replace them.
Look at this as an opportunity. If you're not gonna take up a career in building a peak oil homestead (it really is a career; ask Todd http://www.theoildrum.com/node/4979 ), take a look at health care. I'd say respiratory therapy, but I think nurses may replace them.
I still believe BP is in trouble.I tend to agree that is a distinct possiblity. I have always believed the bottom kill is the best way to kill and cement the well and would not even think about removing the BOP until that is done and some more testing is done.
Flagged you for being an ass.
I haven't been over to one of these BP oil gusher threads for a while, as the quality of the discourse was so bad. I see nothing's changed. Quacks with crazy ideas and cocksure industry supporters who know everything - everyone analyzing the paltry data that is released by government and industry hacks who could not speak a clear sentence (without obscure insider terms and anachronisms) if their life depended on it. Have fun.
I haven't been over to one of these BP oil gusher threads for a while, as the quality of the discourse was so bad. I see nothing's changed. Quacks with crazy ideas and cocksure industry supporters who know everything - everyone analyzing the paltry data that is released by government and industry hacks who could not speak a clear sentence (without obscure insider terms and anachronisms) if their life depended on it. Have fun.
Is it worse than the quality of the video feed?
I'd like a better video feed. I don't see the point in watching fat pixels swirl around in a compressed blue theme park. For one thing I think the animal survey is cool and I'd like to see what they're seeing a lot more clearly. Maybe it'd be easier to see what's rising from the sea floor, and telling a "vortex" from something else would be interesting. But beyond that, it wouldn't tell me squat. I couldn't draw any conclusions based on anything except a big event and even then I couldn't be sure about the cause. We do not know what was rising from the sea floor before top kill or static kill because the video has been crappy and most people had been looking at the stack and the ROVs, but most of all it's because there is no video from before the blowout to compare with.
If I were running this high stakes op with the possibility of another fat tail event in a situation that's unique and at -5000' to -18000', providing HD video from 10 viewpoints to the folks back home would not be high on my list of priorities.
If I were running this high stakes op with the possibility of another fat tail event in a situation that's unique and at -5000' to -18000', providing HD video from 10 viewpoints to the folks back home would not be high on my list of priorities.
Again, the critical datapoint is whether they are pumping mud again.
_________________________________________________________________________
If they are holding pressure at 4200, then they are pumping mud to do that.
_________________________________________________________________________
If they are holding pressure at 4200, then they are pumping mud to do that.
Most sources incl BP say "ambient pressure test" was 4 hours, not 24.
Links? Thad said 24.
. I still do not like the wiggle room in ambient pressure which could mean anything,
Ambient pressure does not leave any wiggle room. It is the pressure under 5000 feet of seawater. The pressure gradient of a column of water is about 0.433 pounds per square inch per foot - nothing wiggly with that.
Rockman supposed they displaced the riser to seawater, which I doubt.
So how did they do it in your opinion? I can not think of any better way.
Certainly they turned off the mud pump.
Yep
So, did it gain or lose mud? How much? Reminds me of the sloppy negative test on DWH.
If it kept ambient pressure there is no way it could have lost mud or mud being added. Any change of volume would also have been a change of pressure.
Another poster mentioned the conundrum of 7500 psi rating in flex joint or capping spool, which mocks the 8000-9000 psi hoped for when they shut in the well three weeks ago.
No conundrum there. The rating of 7500psi is the spec pressure differential between inside and outside of the transition spool (I likely can take much more before rupturing). The 8-9000 psi hoped for would have been inside with a 2160 psi ambient pressure on the outside. The max differential pressure would have stayed below 7000psi, well inside the specs?
Above all, I think it's weird that BP won't show us the wellhead or BOP stack,
I have seen the wellhead every day on this or that rov each of the last days. Just right now UHD30 is showing the HC connector of the upper stack with some white hydrate "beehives". No hiding there.
and multiple ROV obssession with seafloor environment (ostensibly amphipoda)
The biological research was a special mission two of the ROVs did for the Serpent project while there was nothing else to do: http://www.serpentproject.com/
The other sitting ROVs do sonar search, transfer signals from the pressure measuring compacts to the surface or are just parked.
makes me wonder what exactly is being monitored and why. The sonar scan label is wearing thin, because ROVs with that cover story have been pointed at manifold hardware and (as I understand it) sonar only detects heavy oil and asphalt.
No really - gas outbrake for example would distort the seafloor and push a up a mud-column. Sonar could see such a column.
Again, the critical datapoint is whether they are pumping mud again.
There is no place right now where any additional mud could go. The well is killed.
Are you still short BP stock?
Links? Thad said 24.
. I still do not like the wiggle room in ambient pressure which could mean anything,
Ambient pressure does not leave any wiggle room. It is the pressure under 5000 feet of seawater. The pressure gradient of a column of water is about 0.433 pounds per square inch per foot - nothing wiggly with that.
Rockman supposed they displaced the riser to seawater, which I doubt.
So how did they do it in your opinion? I can not think of any better way.
Certainly they turned off the mud pump.
Yep
So, did it gain or lose mud? How much? Reminds me of the sloppy negative test on DWH.
If it kept ambient pressure there is no way it could have lost mud or mud being added. Any change of volume would also have been a change of pressure.
Another poster mentioned the conundrum of 7500 psi rating in flex joint or capping spool, which mocks the 8000-9000 psi hoped for when they shut in the well three weeks ago.
No conundrum there. The rating of 7500psi is the spec pressure differential between inside and outside of the transition spool (I likely can take much more before rupturing). The 8-9000 psi hoped for would have been inside with a 2160 psi ambient pressure on the outside. The max differential pressure would have stayed below 7000psi, well inside the specs?
Above all, I think it's weird that BP won't show us the wellhead or BOP stack,
I have seen the wellhead every day on this or that rov each of the last days. Just right now UHD30 is showing the HC connector of the upper stack with some white hydrate "beehives". No hiding there.
and multiple ROV obssession with seafloor environment (ostensibly amphipoda)
The biological research was a special mission two of the ROVs did for the Serpent project while there was nothing else to do: http://www.serpentproject.com/
The other sitting ROVs do sonar search, transfer signals from the pressure measuring compacts to the surface or are just parked.
makes me wonder what exactly is being monitored and why. The sonar scan label is wearing thin, because ROVs with that cover story have been pointed at manifold hardware and (as I understand it) sonar only detects heavy oil and asphalt.
No really - gas outbrake for example would distort the seafloor and push a up a mud-column. Sonar could see such a column.
Again, the critical datapoint is whether they are pumping mud again.
There is no place right now where any additional mud could go. The well is killed.
Are you still short BP stock?
BP said 4 hours "near ambient" test
http://www.bp.com/genericarticle.do?categoryId=2012968&contentId=7064405
If it kept ambient pressure there is no way it could have lost mud or mud being added. Any change of volume would also have been a change of pressure
Adm Allen said "no depreciable change." That implies some change.
UHD30 is showing the HC connector of the upper stack
I don't think so. Looks like the manifold.
Maybe I read the depth incorrectly.
In any case, I'd like to see the wellhead.
gas outbrake for example would distort the seafloor and push a up a mud-column. Sonar could see such a column.
True. Has it happened?
no place right now where any additional mud could go. The well is killed.
Cool. Are they pumping mud or not? Important question, I think.
My small $ put options are a hedge. Let's see what happens when they detach.
http://www.bp.com/genericarticle.do?categoryId=2012968&contentId=7064405
If it kept ambient pressure there is no way it could have lost mud or mud being added. Any change of volume would also have been a change of pressure
Adm Allen said "no depreciable change." That implies some change.
UHD30 is showing the HC connector of the upper stack
I don't think so. Looks like the manifold.
Maybe I read the depth incorrectly.
In any case, I'd like to see the wellhead.
gas outbrake for example would distort the seafloor and push a up a mud-column. Sonar could see such a column.
True. Has it happened?
no place right now where any additional mud could go. The well is killed.
Cool. Are they pumping mud or not? Important question, I think.
My small $ put options are a hedge. Let's see what happens when they detach.
Adm Allen said "no depreciable change." That implies some change.
Per Merriam-Webster, "appreciable" (not "depreciable"; that's a transcription error): "capable of being perceived or measured."
In other words, if there was a change, it wasn't big enough to be perceived or measured. Doesn't imply "some change."
Per Merriam-Webster, "appreciable" (not "depreciable"; that's a transcription error): "capable of being perceived or measured."
In other words, if there was a change, it wasn't big enough to be perceived or measured. Doesn't imply "some change."
Fair enough. Straight answer about pumping mud would be great. If the pumps have stopped, that's proof the well is killed ("static"). Or they could detach the flexible riser hoses. Or show us the wellhead.
Straight answer about pumping mud would be great.
____________________________________________________________
You have been given straight answers. It does no good.
There are minor leaks around the BOP . Some small amount of mud needs to be pumped every now and then to maintain pressure at 4200.
Kent Wells:
"And so since we've done the cementing procedure a few days back, what we've been doing is holding pressure on top of the cement plug, monitoring that pressure, and it's been holding relatively constant with the exception of the pressure we lose because of the bubbles that are coming out of the capping stack. Those are the bubbles that we've had there since the beginning, and they just continue to go on as a result. We lose a little bit of pressure each hour, but it's been very constant."
____________________________________________________________
You have been given straight answers. It does no good.
There are minor leaks around the BOP . Some small amount of mud needs to be pumped every now and then to maintain pressure at 4200.
Kent Wells:
"And so since we've done the cementing procedure a few days back, what we've been doing is holding pressure on top of the cement plug, monitoring that pressure, and it's been holding relatively constant with the exception of the pressure we lose because of the bubbles that are coming out of the capping stack. Those are the bubbles that we've had there since the beginning, and they just continue to go on as a result. We lose a little bit of pressure each hour, but it's been very constant."
jinn, respectfully, if the cement is good they can detach the BOP. There is no reason to continue to pump and maintain 4200 psi, unless oil & gas are still coming in.
if the cement is good they can detach the BOP.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Yup absolutely true. And you, or BP, or Transocean might have said the same thing on April 20 -> "If the cement is good we don't need no stinking BOP"
____________________________________________________________________________________
Yup absolutely true. And you, or BP, or Transocean might have said the same thing on April 20 -> "If the cement is good we don't need no stinking BOP"
If you see my comment at the bottom, they are talking about replacing the BOP with the one from the DD2 before the bottom kill is executed.
That Allen briefing Aug 13: "We could even put another blow out preventer on because we have sealed the well at this point."
von Altendorf, why are you incapable of informing yourself before making again and again stupid statements here? No reputation to lose anymore?
von Altendorf, why are you incapable of informing yourself before making again and again stupid statements here? No reputation to lose anymore?
Rockman supposed they displaced the riser to seawater, which I doubt.I can, see my post above. My method is easier and allows them to reintroduce the 5000 ft of mud head immediately if necessary.
So how did they do it in your opinion? I can not think of any better way.
How about 2 lines one with mud and one with seawater. A manifold with valves and controls so that a smooth transition in pressure can be seen in the line going to the well.
How about 2 lines one with mud and one with seawaterAlready have the line with mud connected via a manifold to the BOP (choke line as I recall). I guess you could run another line from the floor to the surface and fill with seawater, but I really don't see much point since you can use the existing head by just cracking the choke (the one on the newer BOP) and very little mud or oil and gas would escape.
The stated point of the test was to find out what they can about the annulus. The amount of fluid that came out of the well to lower the pressure is going to be related to flexing of the production casing which is related to the pressure on the outside of the production casing. The pressure on the outside of the production casing is related to whether the space surrounding the production case contains oil or mud.
Those facts coupled with a statement that some special equipment was installed to lower the pressure suggests that maybe they set it up to get a precise volume measurement. Cracking a valve to a line filled with sea water to the surface will tell you precisely how much fluid came out of the well.
Those facts coupled with a statement that some special equipment was installed to lower the pressure suggests that maybe they set it up to get a precise volume measurement. Cracking a valve to a line filled with sea water to the surface will tell you precisely how much fluid came out of the well.
Thanks, Jinn. At last, a possible explanation of how they might infer what's in the space outside the production casing. Or maybe I missed this discussed before. It seems like it involves assumptions about the compliance of the casing, etc. Is this a standard procedure?
Those facts coupled with a statement that some special equipment was installed to lower the pressure suggests that maybe they set it up to get a precise volume measurement. Cracking a valve to a line filled with sea water to the surface will tell you precisely how much fluid came out of the well.The line of seawater would be one way, or perhaps the "special equipment" mentioned was some other way to measure the volume accurately.
FYI - Never "supposed they displaced the riser with sea water". I think I was speculating on the different pressure regimes that might be developed. But then again I throw out so much crap sometimes I'm not sure I always understand me.
Ok, couple of more stupid questions then I'm done.<-- (lie)
I am adrift on a sea of speculation in a boat built from assumptions, I have one oar, and am spinning helplessly in a circle, please help me .
IIRC, it was general consensus there was a considerably amount of produced sand in the oil. I am reading here at the Drum that a sandstone formation/s is believed to be at the bottom of the bore. So did all this "produced sand" come from that formation ? How large a void would have been excavated( I see 60' mentioned )after continuous production for 3+/- months ? Large enough to accommodate 200 barrels of cement ? Cement would pack the external walls of any type of cavity ? How thick would that be ? I know I may not understand how these things happen..are "barrels of cement" reggie barrels, petro barrels,..etc. I am trying to visualize a stack of 200 barrels of cement, which foams to some degree(?) and how much surface area this would cover at a depth of ..idk...6".Or does this cement potentially invade any leaks and seal them ? (in theory)If there were a void/cavity created around the area of the bottom of the borehole, would this complicate drilling more in the immediate vicinity ? Are they drilling this relief well over the top of a possibly large eroded space ?
Another interesting abstract.
" A model for fluid-injection-induced seismicity at the KTB, Germany "
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1365-246X.2003.01837.x/abst...
As far as possible leaks up the annulus, I have been asking people for a couple of weeks now, where this trapped fluid is supposed to go when fluid injections from the bottom relief well start.
On another few subjects, I thought some of you might find this paper interesting, it's something I found while researching possible bio-remediation in the G.o.M. This one left my head spinning.
"Population Genomics and the Bacterial Species Concept"
" In recent years, the importance of horizontal gene transfer (HGT) in bacterial evolution has been elevated to such a degree that many bacteriologists now question the very existence of bacterial species. "
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2842946/
Then there was the subject of the " white things " and how they appear to move.
When the 3-ram cap was installed, I/y'all observed hydrates forming around various small leaks on the capping assembly. One of the more bizarre things I observed was gas bubbles rising out through a leak, and then careening off at a 90 degree angle after hitting the hydrates. Odd I thought , so I asked a friend, this is what he said.
"Presumably the hydrate formers pickup water quickly and become more hydrophilic, they would bounce off of presumed hydrophobic oil. It may be worth looking at the surfaces of some of these things and see how they can segregate under various forces. Hydrophilic/phobic drives many things- for example protein folding that makes enzymes works can be driven by this. Pressure gradients through various size pores of course select on size, and I wouldn't ignore electrochemical issues too. A field will orient polar molecules, induce dipoles and get net-neutrals to migrate. Electrophoretic separation if you will. Interesting, but a couple of lidar hits on the different blobs would be a lot more informative. "
So in addition to marine crustaceans and marine " snow ", there is that to consider too.
Reading this site made me think of a great Woody Allen quote, I might have read it here to begin with :
" Scientists are like the Mafia, they only go after their own kind "
I am adrift on a sea of speculation in a boat built from assumptions, I have one oar, and am spinning helplessly in a circle, please help me .
IIRC, it was general consensus there was a considerably amount of produced sand in the oil. I am reading here at the Drum that a sandstone formation/s is believed to be at the bottom of the bore. So did all this "produced sand" come from that formation ? How large a void would have been excavated( I see 60' mentioned )after continuous production for 3+/- months ? Large enough to accommodate 200 barrels of cement ? Cement would pack the external walls of any type of cavity ? How thick would that be ? I know I may not understand how these things happen..are "barrels of cement" reggie barrels, petro barrels,..etc. I am trying to visualize a stack of 200 barrels of cement, which foams to some degree(?) and how much surface area this would cover at a depth of ..idk...6".Or does this cement potentially invade any leaks and seal them ? (in theory)If there were a void/cavity created around the area of the bottom of the borehole, would this complicate drilling more in the immediate vicinity ? Are they drilling this relief well over the top of a possibly large eroded space ?
Another interesting abstract.
" A model for fluid-injection-induced seismicity at the KTB, Germany "
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1365-246X.2003.01837.x/abst...
As far as possible leaks up the annulus, I have been asking people for a couple of weeks now, where this trapped fluid is supposed to go when fluid injections from the bottom relief well start.
On another few subjects, I thought some of you might find this paper interesting, it's something I found while researching possible bio-remediation in the G.o.M. This one left my head spinning.
"Population Genomics and the Bacterial Species Concept"
" In recent years, the importance of horizontal gene transfer (HGT) in bacterial evolution has been elevated to such a degree that many bacteriologists now question the very existence of bacterial species. "
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2842946/
Then there was the subject of the " white things " and how they appear to move.
When the 3-ram cap was installed, I/y'all observed hydrates forming around various small leaks on the capping assembly. One of the more bizarre things I observed was gas bubbles rising out through a leak, and then careening off at a 90 degree angle after hitting the hydrates. Odd I thought , so I asked a friend, this is what he said.
"Presumably the hydrate formers pickup water quickly and become more hydrophilic, they would bounce off of presumed hydrophobic oil. It may be worth looking at the surfaces of some of these things and see how they can segregate under various forces. Hydrophilic/phobic drives many things- for example protein folding that makes enzymes works can be driven by this. Pressure gradients through various size pores of course select on size, and I wouldn't ignore electrochemical issues too. A field will orient polar molecules, induce dipoles and get net-neutrals to migrate. Electrophoretic separation if you will. Interesting, but a couple of lidar hits on the different blobs would be a lot more informative. "
So in addition to marine crustaceans and marine " snow ", there is that to consider too.
Reading this site made me think of a great Woody Allen quote, I might have read it here to begin with :
" Scientists are like the Mafia, they only go after their own kind "
Issy - Luv the Woody line. I've notice the same in our TOD family expecially while were sitting on our thumbs waiting for the next phase.
Re: where do the fluids go? There are limited possibilities. First, assume they don't pressure up over the frac gradient. If they did the fluid would go were ever the first fracture developed. Stay below FG and you're left with filtrate invasion. Mud (or cmt for the most part) won't flow into a reservoir...particles are too big to flow into the rock. But the particles will plate on the bore hole wall (build "mud cake" and the filtrate (mud minus particles) will be injected into the reservoir if the pressure is greater than the formation pressure. This tends to be a relatively small volume. Another leak point would be thru a weak cmt shoe. And a hole in the csg is another possibility.
But if there's no leak point when they pump they won't pump much before they hit an unacceptable injection pressure. It's can be amazing how little volume is needed to hit a high pressure. There might be 2,000 bbls in the system but pump 10 gallons in a non-leaking well and the effective pressure can jump from 8,000 psi to over 12,000 psi and hit the frac gradient in less than a minute. This how you yest the leak off point (LOT) of a cmt job.
Re: where do the fluids go? There are limited possibilities. First, assume they don't pressure up over the frac gradient. If they did the fluid would go were ever the first fracture developed. Stay below FG and you're left with filtrate invasion. Mud (or cmt for the most part) won't flow into a reservoir...particles are too big to flow into the rock. But the particles will plate on the bore hole wall (build "mud cake" and the filtrate (mud minus particles) will be injected into the reservoir if the pressure is greater than the formation pressure. This tends to be a relatively small volume. Another leak point would be thru a weak cmt shoe. And a hole in the csg is another possibility.
But if there's no leak point when they pump they won't pump much before they hit an unacceptable injection pressure. It's can be amazing how little volume is needed to hit a high pressure. There might be 2,000 bbls in the system but pump 10 gallons in a non-leaking well and the effective pressure can jump from 8,000 psi to over 12,000 psi and hit the frac gradient in less than a minute. This how you yest the leak off point (LOT) of a cmt job.
Isaac - perhaps you could venture into this new topic of magnetics and how such a factor would influence the stability of the formations with forced introduction of reactive polar opposites. Very, very interesting - even if only in a speculative manner. Thanx.
A bit of news on the science front:
http://fio.usf.edu/NewsChannel/10-08-12/FIO_Council_Approves_9M_in_Spill...
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6724#comment-676225
I haven't seen what's being done in other states.
http://fio.usf.edu/NewsChannel/10-08-12/FIO_Council_Approves_9M_in_Spill...
The Florida Institute of Oceanography Council has selected 27 research projects examining the vast impact of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill on the Gulf of Mexico for funding from $10 million provided by oil company BP.The article has a link to the list of approved projects, many of which address questions discussed on TOD. Last one on the list interests me because it could answer some questions about remediating damage to salt marshes, where some of us think the damage from this event may be most severe.
The projects were selected from 233 proposals submitted by researchers at the 20 FIO member institutions and reviewed by top scientists from around Florida.
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6724#comment-676225
I haven't seen what's being done in other states.
Good news, NRD, not least this part: "All data gathered in the projects will be made available through a centralized and public database now being planned. BP will play no role in any of the research efforts."
Based on your experience, when do you suppose we might begin seeing some of the data, then the full reports?
Based on your experience, when do you suppose we might begin seeing some of the data, then the full reports?
lotus: Too long to be emotionally satisfying. :~)
The projects will take whatever time was proposed (maybe as long as 1-3 years for field work, analysis, writing). Then 1-2 years for the peer review and publication processes. It's conceivable that interim reports will be required and posted, but this would be quite unusual and would more likely describe activity than results.
Even so, given the 3-year hold on contracts direct to BP, and the even longer DOJ hold on federal scientists' work, this and other academic work will probably be the leading edge.
The projects will take whatever time was proposed (maybe as long as 1-3 years for field work, analysis, writing). Then 1-2 years for the peer review and publication processes. It's conceivable that interim reports will be required and posted, but this would be quite unusual and would more likely describe activity than results.
Even so, given the 3-year hold on contracts direct to BP, and the even longer DOJ hold on federal scientists' work, this and other academic work will probably be the leading edge.
That's about what I figured, NRD. Thanks. Oh well, we're yet young . . .
Regarding peak oil and global warming:
This may save the day
New solar-powered process removes CO2 from the air and stores it as solid carbon
This may save the day
New solar-powered process removes CO2 from the air and stores it as solid carbon
Looks interesting but we can't put too much faith into any one thing. If we are to combat the after effects of PO and Global warming we must use a variety of methods. But we need to find a balance between them. Why? Because too much of everything will over complicate things, such as the eletric grid.
Though this article reminds me of the proposed plan to pave roads with solar panels. Except it isn't as "out there".
What say you guys?
Though this article reminds me of the proposed plan to pave roads with solar panels. Except it isn't as "out there".
What say you guys?
Kingsford would use the process to make charcoal briquettes. I guess at least it would not really ADD to the total then, just keep recycling what we have now.
@TFHG or anybody else who lives along the GoM: "Millions Of Fish Wash Ashore In Gulfport" T/F?
Nevermind, old story being given a fresh date by the conspiranauts. The CT blogs are filled with tales of zillions of dead fish hitting Atlantic Ocean beaches as far north as Massachussetts.
Nevermind, old story being given a fresh date by the conspiranauts. The CT blogs are filled with tales of zillions of dead fish hitting Atlantic Ocean beaches as far north as Massachussetts.
It's interesting to note that the fish in both the Gulfport and the Massachussetts incidents (and again earlier this week in New Jersey) were all the same type. I believe they are called menhaden and are prone to oxygen depletion. I read it was likely caused by abnormally warm waters ... but I am not a scientist.
Menhaden, yeah. Little silvery darts by the millions, fast food for predators. They keep to shallow water. Makes sense.
snakehead, per my pal on the Biloxi/Gulfport paper (the one who turned me onto Ben Raines): They did find some dead menhaden (bait fish) in one local canal back in early or mid June, I think it was, and another bunch washed ashore on the beach in mid-July (thousands, not millions). "Low oxygen" was the call both times. As TF and b'mommy have been saying, they really could use a little storm or two to ruffle the too-hot, too-still water around there.
snake - Don't follow much MSM but here's my rather cynical view: Has the MSM avoided showing us pics of "millions of dead fish" to not distrube folks or inflame the public's opinion of BP/the govt?
A show of hands, please.
There may well be millions of dead fish out in the deep of the GOM. But I would think we would be inundated with videos of frontend loaders scoping up such carnage along the beaches. Unless they were using those stealth frontend loaders developed by Halliburton, if course.
A show of hands, please.
There may well be millions of dead fish out in the deep of the GOM. But I would think we would be inundated with videos of frontend loaders scoping up such carnage along the beaches. Unless they were using those stealth frontend loaders developed by Halliburton, if course.
The Sun Herald did have photos of the canalful of menhaden, but I don't know about the beach batch (after my friend explained that this is a pretty-much annual occurrence, I paid less attention).
It is annual, at least here in Texas. I believe it was three or four years ago the marinas and shores of Galveston Bay pretty much looked like those pics of the menhaden - although the fish were larger. Three or four inches, as I recall. Ghastly.
Sometimes it's red tide, but most often it's oxygen depletion. It's been hotter 'n Hades this year, and the water temp in Galveston Bay is hitting 89-90 degrees. The shallow waters off Galveston were 87-88 last I checked. It has to be warmer in the marinas. The mullet are starting to swim with their heads out of the water - some people I know don't start worrying about hurricanes until they see mullet heads and dead fish. That's when they know the water's warm enough to support a Cat 5 all the way in. ;)
Sometimes it's red tide, but most often it's oxygen depletion. It's been hotter 'n Hades this year, and the water temp in Galveston Bay is hitting 89-90 degrees. The shallow waters off Galveston were 87-88 last I checked. It has to be warmer in the marinas. The mullet are starting to swim with their heads out of the water - some people I know don't start worrying about hurricanes until they see mullet heads and dead fish. That's when they know the water's warm enough to support a Cat 5 all the way in. ;)
some people I know don't start worrying about hurricanes until they see mullet heads and dead fish. That's when they know the water's warm enough to support a Cat 5 all the way in
Oy. novice, I don't know about you, but I'm starting to think Ma Nature is setting us up for a terrible September er sumpin'. It's just been too damn quiet so far.
Oy. novice, I don't know about you, but I'm starting to think Ma Nature is setting us up for a terrible September er sumpin'. It's just been too damn quiet so far.
I follow a guy from Houma who has his own blog on WeatherUnderground. He does his own analysis, and is darned good. He's understandable for weather non-geeks, answers any and all questions and is pretty good at anxiety reduction. He's been in the swamps all his life - knows the signs as well as the science. Here's his take (comment #196):
One system or the other, we'll probably have TS Danielle designated by this time a week ahead... after we get (ex)TD 5 outta the way by late week, all eyes will be on the very strong, well-organized ELY wave / deep low pressure system coming off Africa that already has appeared impressive since it was over Nigeria days ago. TD / TS formation should occur soon after, perhaps by Friday. Very easily should become our next hurricane... And long range GFS guidance shows another wave behind to develop, perhaps giving us two strong tropical cyclones to track coming across simultaneously, with earliest notions of impact from 1st being toward SE coast (or Bermuda) - usual caveat, that's almost two weeks away. But the African wave train / Atlantic MDR is waking up, right on time in the heart of the season.
http://www.wunderground.com/blog/DocNDswamp/comment.html?entrynum=89
In other words, that "sumpin'" you speak of could be right around the corner. Whether it's for the GOM is still an open question, but we're pretty good at growing our own.
One system or the other, we'll probably have TS Danielle designated by this time a week ahead... after we get (ex)TD 5 outta the way by late week, all eyes will be on the very strong, well-organized ELY wave / deep low pressure system coming off Africa that already has appeared impressive since it was over Nigeria days ago. TD / TS formation should occur soon after, perhaps by Friday. Very easily should become our next hurricane... And long range GFS guidance shows another wave behind to develop, perhaps giving us two strong tropical cyclones to track coming across simultaneously, with earliest notions of impact from 1st being toward SE coast (or Bermuda) - usual caveat, that's almost two weeks away. But the African wave train / Atlantic MDR is waking up, right on time in the heart of the season.
http://www.wunderground.com/blog/DocNDswamp/comment.html?entrynum=89
In other words, that "sumpin'" you speak of could be right around the corner. Whether it's for the GOM is still an open question, but we're pretty good at growing our own.
Well, I hope something jes' plumb irresistible to lows sets up shop in the North Atlantic and invites all of 'em to come up thataway to party. Mhh.
Thanks for the DocNDswamp tip, too.
Thanks for the DocNDswamp tip, too.
Afternoon Snake~I saw the "nevermind" but thought I'd pop in anyway, I have seen the plethora of pic's and articles on the CT's sites, we did have about 40+ dead crabs wash up last week and UWF came out to gather some, I was told and tend to believe it's due to oxygen depletion from the extremely warm water, it has to be 90+ where I live. The good news is the last storm has cased extremely rough surf (red flag in fact) for a few days so hopefully the water was churned up not only here but in other spots in the GOM.
mummsie
mummsie
Better check the rovs. That wasn't silt. s/s later.
Three cams. Skandi on 2 of them. I had to contrast that piece of equipment to bled out to get the area arrowed to come up, but it looked as though there was dark matter coming up below it. I get tired of this dancing around the freakin' word "oil". Is that a jelly fish or tube worm getting battered? I hope its not The Eel, or should I say I hope it's not hurt if it's alive. Shows there's substantial force behind all that sonne et lumiere.
BTW-the reason the albums appear to have multiple s/s of same thing is because I use the h/m/s function to time/date stamp with vlc s/s. This allows for documentation as does including s/s from alternate cameras when recording.
Nothing to see here folks. Yeah, right!
BTW-the reason the albums appear to have multiple s/s of same thing is because I use the h/m/s function to time/date stamp with vlc s/s. This allows for documentation as does including s/s from alternate cameras when recording.
Nothing to see here folks. Yeah, right!
The third one down is clearly a fetal pig.
It's very clear. You can see it.
It's very clear. You can see it.
Today's weather in the GOM
Here's a good article about bacterial degradation of oil and oxygen depletion, from Chemical and Engineering News. It's well-informed but written for lay readers.
http://pubs.acs.org/cen/science/88/8832sci1.html?featured=1
I wish someone would offer an educated guess about rates of biodegradation. As a not-so-well-educated guess, it seems to me that bacterial metabolism + photolysis must have removed roughly 35-40% of the oil that has vanished from the surface slicks, because I can't see how other mechanisms would account for that fraction. If so, they must also have made a substantial dent in the oil dispersed in the warm upper layers of the Gulf.
A scientist interviewed for the article points out that biodegradation in the depths will proceed much more slowly because of the low temperatures slowing metabolic processes. Also I suspect all the dissolved methane down there might be tempting the bugs to eat dessert before dinner.
http://pubs.acs.org/cen/science/88/8832sci1.html?featured=1
I wish someone would offer an educated guess about rates of biodegradation. As a not-so-well-educated guess, it seems to me that bacterial metabolism + photolysis must have removed roughly 35-40% of the oil that has vanished from the surface slicks, because I can't see how other mechanisms would account for that fraction. If so, they must also have made a substantial dent in the oil dispersed in the warm upper layers of the Gulf.
A scientist interviewed for the article points out that biodegradation in the depths will proceed much more slowly because of the low temperatures slowing metabolic processes. Also I suspect all the dissolved methane down there might be tempting the bugs to eat dessert before dinner.
Thanks for the link. I enjoyed the article, as well as a couple of others linked from that page.
Agreed, this is really terrific.
Admiral Allen on his presser just said that there will be more testing and a request letter to BP for various risk mitigation plans.
The RW is currently 3.5 x 50' away from its target and won't move forward until he gives the go ahead, at which point it will take about 96 hrs for interception. The bottom kill will be executed, he says.
The RW is currently 3.5 x 50' away from its target and won't move forward until he gives the go ahead, at which point it will take about 96 hrs for interception. The bottom kill will be executed, he says.
He asked BP for risk mitigation plans? Here's hoping they farm that out.
lol.
he also mentioned the possibility of replacing the BOP before the bottom kill; they would bring it over from the DD2.
the word of the day was definitely "pressure".
keep an eye out on the daily kos, that guy was asking some pretty serious questions (and, for some reason, he got through at least three times -- perhaps Thad planted him).
he also mentioned the possibility of replacing the BOP before the bottom kill; they would bring it over from the DD2.
the word of the day was definitely "pressure".
keep an eye out on the daily kos, that guy was asking some pretty serious questions (and, for some reason, he got through at least three times -- perhaps Thad planted him).
I find it incredible that they chose to go down this path of endless testing when the relief well was touted, by many, to be the safe, sane and logical thing to do. John Wright was 40 for 40 as I recall.
I'm not in the business so I have no authority to comment but it seems to me they are making it up as they go. Don't understand why the relief well wasn't their primary objective after July 15.
I'm not in the business so I have no authority to comment but it seems to me they are making it up as they go. Don't understand why the relief well wasn't their primary objective after July 15.
A curiosity question....since the static kill I haven't seen any mention that I can recall as to what type mud is being used in the BO well. Did they pump Oil Base Mud, which was used in the original operation or did they go with Water Base Mud to test injectivity and then displace the cement with?
I do not understand why they did not expect this. With the relatively low pressure rating of the cap, it is more understandable why they wanted to do the Top Kill. The lower well integrity was sufficient to do a Top Kill, but that integrity was never completely verified. I think we all know it was questionable, no matter what they told the sheople.
So they got themselves a different kind of mess now. If they cannot fix it with the one relief well, they better get busy with the other. Whatever it takes them to plug that well completely, they better do carefully. And with an emergency response plan in place.
Doomsday scenarios aside, that Gulf floor is not so stable that we are out of the woods yet.
So they got themselves a different kind of mess now. If they cannot fix it with the one relief well, they better get busy with the other. Whatever it takes them to plug that well completely, they better do carefully. And with an emergency response plan in place.
Doomsday scenarios aside, that Gulf floor is not so stable that we are out of the woods yet.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please keep comments free of vulgarity. Your message will be deleted if not.
This thing is vulgar by it's self.