Oil leak in the gulf

[yojack1]

Wow Jack, that was very harsh and unnecessary.

Accidents happen, despite all the money / people you throw at it.

We lost 2 space shuttles despite the billions of dollars we spend on the space program, with some of the brightest people in the world working to exacting standards. Shows that accidents will happen, because man is not perfect, and there will be mistakes / errors no matter what.

Life is not perfect. This is a tragedy, and a disaster.

Hopefully the good that will come of this will prevent or greatly reduce any future incidents.

You guys are right. I do apologize and I do care, seeing my name like that set me off. Hope to stay on this thread!

Jack

 

[Ko-nsx]

I will try and post as i can the updates, BUT i don't want to report any bad info because things can and do change fast out here.

Thanks for all the well wishes from you guys, but im not a victim. I didnt loose a husband/father/grandfather etc, in the fire. I don't have to make critical decisions with limited info, and under so much stress and scrutiny. I dont have a fishing boat, I'm not in the fishing/shrimping/oyster industry and I won't have to explain to the entire world what went wrong. If we loose power then.......oh shit.:smile:

Im a cog in the wheel. I keep the power generation running and all the electrical/electronics equipment on line so everybody can do what they need to do to continue with the efforts.

Jack, i just wanted to slow you up a bit. I have no hard feelings from any of your post and i don't wish to see you get beat up on prime from a keyboard.:biggrin:

Fraternally,
KO-nsx:biggrin:

 

[yojack1]

Sometimes I have a tendency to go a little scooters with these kind of events. Thanks for slowing me down guys!:redface:

Jack

 

[Biscuit]

^
Thanks for the kinds words. I am not a BP or Transocean fanboy. We are out here 21 days and work 12 hours shifts, normally. But 16 hour days seem to be the norm now. We are testing and re-testing EVERYTHING related to power generation and subsea well control. Most of the info is gathered through high tech equipment and it can very hard to make decisions off that alone. If we have an equipment failure, we can't hop in the truck and go to Grainger and get a replacement. Crew boats have been running non-stop out here with supplies and equipment. People are having to make hard decisions, with out actually being down there to put your hands on the stuff. Yes the ROV's help tremedously, but its still difficult to give answers to ALL the scenarios addressed AND be accountable. The VP of transocean is actually making house calls to the victims families. Even with all the meetings and changes(like this weather we are having out here), the BP Co. reps have been very good about information and understanding families concerns. I believe on the HORZION one of our rig managers suffered a broken leg and had burns over 25% of his body. We are family out here too. Its a lot of teamwork out here and DEEP concern about preventing any more death to others and the environment.

Stay safe sir and god bless you for your efforts.

 

[swerve2007]

Wow Jack, that was very harsh and unnecessary.

Accidents happen, despite all the money / people you throw at it.

We lost 2 space shuttles despite the billions of dollars we spend on the space program, with some of the brightest people in the world working to exacting standards. Shows that accidents will happen, because man is not perfect, and there will be mistakes / errors no matter what.

Life is not perfect. This is a tragedy, and a disaster.

Hopefully the good that will come of this will prevent or greatly reduce any future incidents.

completely agree with the tone of your comment but i do not want to be pointing out the obvious that space travel is a bit more complex than engineering a shutoff valve that will function- triple redundancy that fails? the only way to turn it off is by wrenching rusty knobs by submersible? sounds to me it was either 'too expensive' or 'inconvenient' to have it done correctly- if we can have a submersible working without failure at that depth then we can have valve assemblies that do not leak and are automated. and this is not a comment against people trying to contain it as these decisions are made way above their pay scale.

 

[NsXMas]

completely agree with the tone of your comment but i do not want to be pointing out the obvious that space travel is a bit more complex than engineering a shutoff valve that will function- triple redundancy that fails? the only way to turn it off is by wrenching rusty knobs by submersible? sounds to me it was either 'too expensive' or 'inconvenient' to have it done correctly- if we can have a submersible working without failure at that depth then we can have valve assemblies that do not leak and are automated. and this is not a comment against people trying to contain it as these decisions are made way above their pay scale.

I have heard it often stated that working deep under the ocean is far more difficult than working on the moon.

Why people think just because it's on planet Earth that makes it somehow simpler than outer space... some of the most difficult environments are in places where manned vehicles can't even make it, like deep under the sea, rather than outer space where we can have space walks.

I think one big problem is human hubris, thinking that due to our technology we can forsee and fix any and all problems. Sadly that illusion is quickly stripped away by mother nature.

PS - your post seems to infer you know what the problem is, and what the fix is. Care to share how you can insightfully figure that out thousands of miles away from the actual site of the accident?? Ko-NSX must be a knucklehead if he can't figure this shit out while you sitting in your lazyboy can understand and resolve the problem remotely, no??

 

[swerve2007]

I have heard it often stated that working deep under the ocean is far more difficult than working on the moon.

Why people think just because it's on planet Earth that makes it somehow simpler than outer space... some of the most difficult environments are in places where manned vehicles can't even make it, like deep under the sea, rather than outer space where we can have space walks.

I think one big problem is human hubris, thinking that due to our technology we can forsee and fix any and all problems. Sadly that illusion is quickly stripped away by mother nature.

PS - your post seems to infer you know what the problem is, and what the fix is. Care to share how you can insightfully figure that out thousands of miles away from the actual site of the accident?? Ko-NSX must be a knucklehead if he can't figure this shit out while you sitting in your lazyboy can understand and resolve the problem remotely, no??

wow.
feeling singled out? i should have posted my comment without quoting your post which i used as a reference- a mistake obviously, i am not grilling you so quit being confrontational.
while not a petroleum engineer, i am an engineer so i understand most aspects. there are a lot more variables to deal with when leaving earth in a vehicle that has to perform all these different functions- undersea is mostly pressure so yes, while immensly difficult, it is in a way much simpler dealing with depth, especially when you are building fairly simple devices with a single function- open / close.
it is absolutely possible to engineer a completely fail-safe system- it is just expensive- remember the lobbying. from what is obvious today, the platform sank severing the connection with the well-head and they have been trying to close the valve- since we saw the techs messing with the valving and from what the news reported, the leak is from the valve assembly, not from the interface between the well-head and the seabed. so nothing rocket-science here and while the platform's sinking is nature-related, the failures of the valve are cost-related. they cheaped out on design/manufacturing, gambled and lost and we are paying for it. it has nothing to do with ko-nsx not trying to figure it out etc and contain it. these guys are actually victims here getting the blame for corporate decisions and now really have to scratch their heads dealing with some broken pos.

 

[FogCityNSX]

completely agree with the tone of your comment but i do not want to be pointing out the obvious that space travel is a bit more complex than engineering a shutoff valve that will function- triple redundancy that fails? the only way to turn it off is by wrenching rusty knobs by submersible? sounds to me it was either 'too expensive' or 'inconvenient' to have it done correctly- if we can have a submersible working without failure at that depth then we can have valve assemblies that do not leak and are automated. and this is not a comment against people trying to contain it as these decisions are made way above their pay scale.

In response, an older response.

BP is the Oil company. Transocean is the DRILLING contractor that leased the Horizon to BP. All the systems did not fail and NOBODY KNOWS EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED IN SEQUENCE. Most of the info we could have gotten is with the 11 members of the drill crew aboard the Deepwater Horizon, that is now........ you know where. The well is not gushing, but seeping. The BOP was partially closed, not entirely closed. There are a number of ROVS in water giving assessments.

Its so easy to think WE KNOW BETTER after the fact. Sort of like those who think they'd make a better presidential decision than the actual president when the time came up. Soon after all settles down, someone will be saying, "Well all they had to do was this...." or "What a stupid decision they made, it was obvious....." etc etc

Bottomline, sometimes we all think we know better than "them".

 

[swerve2007]

In response, an older response.



Its so easy to think WE KNOW BETTER after the fact. Sort of like those who think they'd make a better presidential decision than the actual president when the time came up. Soon after all settles down, someone will be saying, "Well all they had to do was this...." or "What a stupid decision they made, it was obvious....." etc etc

Bottomline, sometimes we all think we know better than "them".

please note that nowhere in my post did i say i know exactly what happened or do i in any way diminish the sacrifice or even question anyones decision, erroneus or not. neither am i in any way discussing the event of the platform's sinking and the death it caused.
both of my post mention and refer only to the failure of a safety device so crucial to preventing oil leaks in an event of such an occurance and which has absolutely no human error to blaim for its lack of proper operation but its design and manufacturing. and that is cost-related and preventable.

 

[Swift]

^
Thanks for the kinds words. I am not a BP or Transocean fanboy. We are out here 21 days and work 12 hours shifts, normally. But 16 hour days seem to be the norm now. We are testing and re-testing EVERYTHING related to power generation and subsea well control. Most of the info is gathered through high tech equipment and it can very hard to make decisions off that alone. If we have an equipment failure, we can't hop in the truck and go to Grainger and get a replacement. Crew boats have been running non-stop out here with supplies and equipment. People are having to make hard decisions, with out actually being down there to put your hands on the stuff. Yes the ROV's help tremedously, but its still difficult to give answers to ALL the scenarios addressed AND be accountable. The VP of transocean is actually making house calls to the victims families. Even with all the meetings and changes(like this weather we are having out here), the BP Co. reps have been very good about information and understanding families concerns. I believe on the HORZION one of our rig managers suffered a broken leg and had burns over 25% of his body. We are family out here too. Its a lot of teamwork out here and DEEP concern about preventing any more death to others and the environment.

I think most of us that have written comments want you to understand we are not mad at you, the workers, and we know people lost their lives. What we want to know, and hopefully you can give us insight, is how are you getting "real" info that says that not all three valves failed, and are partially closed....and yet the news reports they all failed? Now we all know the news is easily swayed in reporting and don't get facts right, but I hope for our sake BP/Transocean aren't lying to YOU the WORKERS that do put their life at risk everyday.

We all are mad that 1) people lost their lives and at what cost and 2) the fail safes didn't work and now there is different stories as to why

 

[FogCityNSX]

please note that nowhere in my post did i say i know exactly what happened or do i in any way diminish the sacrifice or even question anyones decision, erroneus or not. neither am i in any way discussing the event of the platform's sinking and the death it caused.
both of my post mention and refer only to the failure of a safety device so crucial to preventing oil leaks in an event of such an occurance and which has absolutely no human error to blaim for its lack of proper operation but its design and manufacturing. and that is cost-related and preventable.

My response was due to you mentioning 3 failed devices in which a person on site said all systems did not fail. I underlined those sections for you, and also how the people who possibly may know the answer to why something went wrong, are deceased so others are working to figure things out.

But by sitting at home safely unrelated to whats going on, its easy to assume things.

 

[swerve2007]

i have not assigned blame to any worker or made any assumptions just an affirmations that safety devices on the sea-floor failed to work- the safety devices are designed to perform regardless of human error or influence (or at least i hope that is the case in oil-industry as it is in aerospace), the fact they did not is not the fault of people involved (now dead) but the design and manufacturing which are cost-related and subject to decisions at corporate level (and lobbying- see the previous posts) and is a systemic, not personal failure. we still have a leak so it matters not that something worked partially- failure is a failure meaning inadequate execution (the shuttle worked perfectly with the exception of one o-ring, right?), especially when it would have been infintisemally cheaper to make it right in the first place instead of dealing with the cleanup. the platform's sinking may be a human error combined with weather- i do not know and am not discussing it here. this is an industry problem, failing to install adeqcuatly sophisticated equipment at the crucial interface with the seabed, IMHO. the only human error here is the person making the financial decision either not caring about the possible consequences or gambling that it would not be necessary and 'good enaugh'- this is the only assumption i am making here.

 

[Ko-nsx]

I've read some of the responses. There is a TON of money spent on offshore equipment. Thinking that we a set of rusty valves on the ocean floor to protect us from blow outs is kinda funny and pitiful at the same time. I'm not sure i can show you guys(take pics) out here without creating a situation but i'll try. I don't want to get in trouble sending out the wrong info or posting pics and such. I do know that people have pics and such on facebook.

Try to think, it was not some much of a valve not opening or closing but an EXPLOSION. On a square semisub in the middle of the night, are you gonna jump 90 feet to the water, or have a meeting about why the rig is burning down? Someone made the decision to abandon ship and sounded the alarm. When you hear that alarm you go to the assigned or nearest lifeboat. I believe the explosion was caused by the engines. The engines took in gas in the air from the blowing well and ignited, the pics we saw show them being blown out the wall of the rig. Even the helideck had a HOLE in it. Again all this happened at night, in the middle of the ocean. We do not have valves and LMRP/BOP from home depot to shut in a high pressure well 5000 feet below sea level. This is expensive high tech equipment inspected by MMS and DNV.

The bottom line is when you hear that alarm you go to lifeboats and get off, immediately. If i hear it out here, im getting the hell out of dodge!!!! Ya'll can call me whatever you want, im not built to withstand fire or jump 90 feet and hit one of the pontoons below. They would much rather have a spill to deal with than death.

 

[Mr Payne]

Ok, what genius out there can tell us (what if ) if they can't stop that oil spewing out from a 5,000' deep gusher, what's at stake?

Probably a lot. Figure 90 days of 5000bbls/day.

The oil companies fail safe shutoff valve designed for just this scenario failed. Now they are scratching their asses trying to come up with a solution.

Yep.

Will the underwater gusher ever stop itself?

Yes, once reservoir pressure is below hydrostatic pressure flow will go to zero.

Will it get bigger?

Depends if the wellhead/BOP fails even more.

Will it be stopped in weeks or months or maybe never?

It will get stopped. Just takes time.

Has anything even close to this, happened before?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ixtoc_I

Could this pollute all the oceans if it can't be stopped?

No.

Whats the environmental outlook in the short term? (Say one Month)

Unknown.

Whats the outlook for a worst case scenario? (Many months to years)

BP goes bankrupt, oil price spikes, unemployment spikes further - but no more blowouts happen.

The innocent wildlife, perhaps we ain't seen nothin' yet. Whats going to be the toll of millions of animals?

The toll might be tough. Might lead to the end of certain industries on the Gulf (which, from a jobs perspective, are mere fractions of what the oil industry provides). Sad, but true.

How long before eating anything taken out of the water is safe?

Unknown.

How long before the oil companies start taking advantage raping us with higher fuel prices?

Oil consumers like yourself allow oil companies to make money. Perhaps if you stopped driving you wouldn't get raped by higher oil prices.

I just heard that if they screw up again trying to cap the head and it breaks off, they say it would be like an underwater volcano that can't be stopped. Is this true?

A volcano that eventually loses pressure.

On Larry King tonight they were talking about, get this, could aliens from another world be a threat to us. Brilliant! I thought a disaster like this would have taken precedent. Seems to me that this is a situation that needs the utmost urgency for a fix and our government better get their act together and soon. The food supply in the gulf depends on it.

The government, undoubtedly, will need to rely on the experience of evil oil companies to stop this.

Any oil drilling experts out there?

Nope, but i know more than most.

 

[swerve2007]

Thinking that we a set of rusty valves on the ocean floor to protect us from blow outs is kinda funny and pitiful at the same time.
We do not have valves and LMRP/BOP from home depot to shut in a high pressure well 5000 feet below sea level. This is expensive high tech equipment inspected by MMS and DNV.
QUOTE]

i am using your post as a reference not to pick on your comments.
i would like to ask that we do not mix the events of the rig sinking in the middle of the night along with the speculation of the cause of the sinking etc. with the event of well-head safety devices failing and failing to control the spill- these are two separate situations although obviously related.
please notice that we understand that you guys are now in a predicament trying to fix something that is already broken and you have to improvise, don't have the custom equipment on hand etc, that is not the argument. just like it is not an argument that people scattering on the rig in the middle of night after explosion are not thinking about anything else but their own skin.
the point i was making is that it is hard to accept an explanation that something simply fails- especially such a crucial piece of equipment as a well-head, with all these redundancy systems in place that supposed to cut the flow of crude in the event of such an incident. unless i am mistaken, there was no explosion down there so the failure is not catastrophic but mechanical, and that, by design, is fully preventable although expensive. if the last resort is someone in a sub turning the wrench, then that super expensive equipment is not nearly sophisticated enaugh for the job at hand.
i hope you figure it out soon.

 

[Mr Payne]

the point i was making is that i do not accept an explanation that something simply fails- especially such a crucial piece of equipment as a well-head, with all these redundancy systems in place that supposed to cut the flow of crude in the event of such an incident. unless i am mistaken, there was no explosion down there so the failure is not catastrophic but mechanical. if the last resort is someone in a sub turning the wrench, then that super expensive equipment is not nearly sophisticated enaugh for the job.

Once the "abandon ship" signal is given on a drilling rig a lot of the functional capability is lost.

I would surmise that the main problem is not the blowout, as blowouts have happened before on offshore rigs without similar consequences. The problem is the explosion.

I would guess the reservoir is 10000+ psi (from the depths and reported flows). However the flows have varied so widely I think it's pretty much a wild ass guess at this point. Wherever the leak is in the riser or wellbore/wellhead, the pressure at those points will be so high no ROV will be able to get near it.

 

[swerve2007]

can you confirm that the main leak is coming from the well-head, not the seafloor? if that is the case then we really need to separate this tragedy into sub-categories: one being the rig explosion and the other the well-head failure. also, can you confirm that well-head safety valves are not amutomated but controlled by the crew?

if anyone can post or confirm the details on how the safety features on the well-head (sea-floor) are operated i think it would be detrimental to our discussion.

 

[Mr Payne]

can you confirm that the main leak is coming from the well-head, not the seafloor?

The wellhead (really, the BOP). I'm not an offshore guy, so Ko might know more about the mechanical details of the riser assembly, etc.

if that is the case then we really need to separate this tragedy into sub-categories: one being the rig explosion and the other the well-head failure.

Yeah, it's probably good to do that.

also, can you confirm that well-head safety valves are not amutomated but controlled by the crew?

Both. I am guessing the crew attempted to actuate the BOP and it did not respond as intended. Additionally the automated function did not work - that would make me think it's due to mechanical failure in one of the systems (violent kick?).

if anyone can post or confirm the details on how the safety features on the well-head (sea-floor) are operated i think it would be detrimental to our discussion.

No idea.

 

[swerve2007]

I am guessing the crew attempted to actuate the BOP and it did not respond as intended. Additionally the automated function did not work - that would make me think it's due to mechanical failure in one of the systems (violent kick?).

QUOTE]

thank you.
so for now lets assume, unless anyone else shares other info, that the actual cause of the spill is a mechanical failure independent of the explosion and any human error which was the direction i was heading with my posts, just to clarify.

 

[Mr Payne]

Probably the best thing written so far.

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6421

 

[Mr Payne]

thank you.
so for now lets assume, unless anyone else shares other info, that the actual cause of the spill is a mechanical failure independent of the explosion and any human error which was the direction i was heading with my posts, just to clarify.

My recent link shows in much more detail the issues at hand and operationally how it might have happened (which is much different from my guesses).

 

[Ko-nsx]

My recent link shows in much more detail the issues at hand and operationally how it might have happened (which is much different from my guesses).

I don't have the time to show a BOP that would be on the horizon. That pic of the BOP in the link is a land rig, i believe. I'll try to snap a photo ours on this rig. Its at least 5 stories tall. MASSIVE.

Swerve, the cause of the explosion happened as such. Not a lot of real estate on Semi's. You keep suggesting that BP bought cheap equipment and it failed because it was cheap. Or SOMEBODY could have closed the valve before the fire.
1. upon getting signal of high gas levels(a kick) the LMRP was given a release signal to be released. In order to detach from the BOP the driller has to pull up on the entire stack a little so it can actually release. DUE TO THE EXPLOSION CAUSED BY HIGH GAS LEVELS, this was not able to be completed.
2. Explosion was in the engine room, all fuel to engine was shut off reducing power......basically putting the rig in the dark, thats mostly automated. The E-gen start giving power to vital services such as lights, fire fighting equipment and escape equipment. In this gas the engine room was below the rig floor, so with the explosion it obviously took out the 11 members of the drill crew and MI- Swaco mud engineers. Or at least cause a really big fire. ya'll saw the pics.
3. E-gen keep enough power to run the vital services buss, not the little guy you claim we could have in a little sub to go down and turn off the little faucet:smile: We get kicks out here and they immediately suspend all hot work and smoking in smoke areas. Kicks can be controlled, explosions are tricky.

We are attempting to
1. attach our BOP to the Horizon stack, deploy choke kill lines to relieve to gain some control and take some pressure off the kinked line so it can be possible lifted out of the way.
2. release the horizon LMRP, set our stack on top of it to control the leak.
3. the stack has riser coming out of the top and it is kinked, thats why its seeping. If they stand the pipe up, un kinking it, it could spew and basically but all the ROV's in the dark. The riser sections are about 80 feet long here, not sure about the horizon.
4. ROV's are attempting to cut some of it away. but if they lift on the kinked pipe, it will probably spew and limit visibility for the ROv's(swerve's robots). This would not be good.
5. So a dome is being deployed to contain the any spillage from the bop/stack converstion. That is gonna be pumped and processed to this rig.
they are as of today about 10 scenarios be reviewed, 7 include this rig.
6. Mud is pumped into the riser to prevent and control kicks and its pumped back up to the shaker house to be filter and sent back downhole. It does cool the drilling bit also, i believe they had done a cement job earlier and were testing a cement plug at the time. We are taking on mud as i type.

It's extremely difficult to measure the success rate of an operation that is a mile below the surface.

I have tried to shed some truth about what is going on out here. My info may not be 100%, because its changing rapidly and such, but im doing my best to share with those concerned or just curious.

Please excuse any of my run-ons, typos or any empty explanations, i just dont have the time now to proofread. While i'm try NOT to speculate and give some real info aside from the media, the best answers to ALL OUR QUESTIONS are unfortunately at the bottom of the GOM.

 

[Moses]

Been waiting for you to post KO, glad to hear you're okay. Good luck with everything out and I wish y'all the best of luck and to come home safe.

 

[steveny]

If the rig went down would the debris be laying on top of the well thus making it impossible for a sub to reach the spewing well?

 

[swerve2007]

great, thanks for your posts.
once again, just to make sure i am not misunderstood, i am not speculating what has caused the explosion and consequent sinking nor am i simplifying the rescue operation and difficulty of dealing with debris.

my assesment is a simple failure mode-analysis.
summarizing my previous posts-
IMHO the current well-head safety features are not up to snuff if, even though they are automated and have manual backup, they can fail- that is not acceptable on such a crucial piece of equipment. from Ko-nsx comments i surmise that all automated safety systems are dependant on power generation from the rig, which in itself is a faulty approach- it is obvious you cannot trigger the safety devices if there is no power or crew to do so. this is what i have been trying to point out. for these systems to be effective and dependable they must be independent from all outside factors- just like the black-box on the airliner- power, weather and humans.
the shutoff should be triggered not by the crew but by any event outside of normal operation- pressure change, power loss, water leak etc. and the systems doing so should be powered by a source located on the well-head, not on the rig (maybe a set of batteries continuously charged by the rig up to the point of need).
in this case it is 'spilled milk' but i hope that the least we get from this tragedy is an evaluation / redesign of our safety systems on the sea-floor.