This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Admiral Allen Says Gas Seep is from the Rigel Gas Field ... Did BP Accidentally Tap Into the Rigel Gas Field?
On July 23rd, Admiral Thad Allen said that the seep 3 kilometers from the leaking BP well was from the Rigel gas field:
David
Dishneau: Admiral, this is David Dishneau from The Associated Press. I
have a question regarding that seep that we’ve been trying to, that was
identified within three kilometers… And I know that the Interior
Department now is trying to assist with identifying that but the AP has
developed a map that shows the two old wells within the radius that you
described. And I wondered if I could show you this map and you could
point out which of those you believe.
Admiral Allen: You caught me without my glasses. I think I can answer your question. I think we believe it might be attributed to what’s called the Rigel well, r-i-g-e-l
Rigel is a huge deepwater gas field.
Portions of the gas field are directly south of the blownout BP well in Mississippi Canyon Block 296 (MC296), as well as in Mississippi Canyon Block 252 (MC252), where BP's blownout oil well is located:
In
a series of 3 articles, Florida Oil Spill Law (FOSL) rounds up
information on the Rigel gas field, and its potential interaction with
BP's oil well.
Initially, FOSL provides general background on the Rigel field:
Federal officials visit oil spill area, talk with BP, Oil & Gas Journal, April 30, 2010:
Transocean
Ltd.’s Deepwater Horizon semisubmersible was on contract to BP to drill
the Macondo well on Mississippi Canyon Block 252 in 4,992 ft of water near Rigel gas field. An Apr. 20 explosion and fire rocked the semi, leaving 11 crew members missing and presumed dead and injuring 17.Westside – Rigel Deepwater Field Appraisal and Development, Westside Study Group, November 16, 2005
The
Rigel exploration well, the Texaco OCS-G-18207 #1, was drilled in 1999
in Gulf of Mexico block MC 252 in 5200’ water depth. The well targeted a
Miocene age, low-relief downthrown closure/stratigraphic trap that was supported by a strong amplitude response
on the 3D seismic data. … The well encountered what was interpreted to
be a 176’ thick gas-charged, low-permeability siltstone in the Rob E-age
target. …
The appraisal drilling by Dominion, the operator, with its partners, Mariner and Newfield, was highly successful. As a result, the Rigel field is currently being developed as a one-well subsea tieback, as part of a larger subsea system. The project is nearly complete.
MTS Houston presentation May 25 to feature Dominion’s Rigel/17 Hands Subsea Development in the GOM, Oil Online, April 6, 2006:
Rigel/17 Hands is a two-well, subsea, dry gas development in the Mississippi Canyon 252
area of the Gulf of Mexico, in water depths ranging from 3400 feet to
5800 feet. The two wells are tied back to the Chevron VK 900 host
facility via the alrea flowline. All the equipment and controls were
designed to be compatible with the existing Chevron system.
The
distance from the host facility to the Rigel and 17 Hands wells is
approximately 40 and 50 miles, respectively. Combined flow rates from
the two dry gas wells is around 150 MMCFPD.Dominion Makes Deepwater Discovery at Rigel Prospect, Rig Zone, November 05, 2003:
Dominion Exploration and Production has made a deepwater discovery at its Rigel prospect, located at Mississippi Canyon Block 296
in the Gulf of Mexico. The discovery is located in about 5,200′ of
water… drilled to a total depth of about 16,200′ and encountered 140′ of
gross gas pay in the main Rob E objective. Additional pay was found in a
shallow objective that may allow for a future recompletion. The well
has been temporarily abandoned for future use as a subsea completion.Cal Dive Installs 17 Hands and Rigel Flowline System, Rig Zone, June 06, 2005:
Cal Dive International recently completed the installation of Dominion Exploration & Production’s 17 Hands and Rigel flow line system.
The project included the installation subsea to subsea of 121,072 feet
of 8 inch diameter pipe in water depths ranging from 3,500 to 5,883 feet
from CDI’s reel lay vessel Intrepid. The pipe lay operation
was initiated at the 17 Hands well location in MC 299 utilizing Cal
Dive’s hinge over Pipeline End Termination (“PLET”) system, an in-line
PLET was installed at the Rigel well in MC 252 then the flowline system was terminated with a standard second end PLET at the Gemini manifold location in MC 292.Speculation about a possible impact on the Rigel well did occur at the Oil Drum. Once. About a month ago.
BP’s Deepwater Oil Spill – The Admiral on Casing and Connections, Oil Drum, June 21, 2010:
[Comment by Lurking]
Anybody happen to know if the Rigel or 17 Hands gas fields are in danger of being affected by fluids from the BP stovepipe?…
The reason I ask is that over the last few days, I’ve seen what appear to be more gas in the plume…
as if I can tell what it is when I see it. I’m referring to the globs
of bluish white that you see in the plume.. not the milky dispersant
from the nozzles. I have no idea what the pay depth for those two fields are, but if they are contributing to the flow… that would be bad.[Response by Bignerd]
Funny, I was looking at that the other day.
I’ve
got a map which shows what I think is the Macondo well over to the east
side of the 252 block, whereas the Rigel field straddles the southern
boundary.
The Seventeen Hands gas line and an oil export line from Na Kika both cross the block in the south and west.
So all other on block infrastructure looks to be about 3 km to the south and west of the Macondo well.
[Response by Lurking]
The
Rigel prospect has a measured depth of 16,200 feet. Macondo was drilled
to 18,000 feet (and change). … [My comment: there is "weakness" in the
blown out Macondo well at 9,000 and 17,000 feet]
[I]t
seems to me that 3 to 7 miles is not that far in strata that is as
close as 340 vertical feet apart and that varies from impermeable to
highly porous.
[The Macondo well] had to drill past (through?) that level [of the Rigel well] with what is now a casing of dubious integrity.
***
Next, FOSL asks whether it is possible that gas from the Rigel field is flowing in to BP's blown out oil well:
Is the Rigel gas field why Congressman Markey’s wrote the mysterious June 23 letter about oil flowing into the well?
See 'Clear Shot to the Surface' (Times-Picayune)
“Experts say that the open annulus could be how [a methane bubble] that destroyed the Deepwater Horizon got to the surface.” - Times Picayune
The nearby Rigel gas deposits are at a similar depth to the compromised section of BP's Macondo well.
***
Congressman Markey’s June 23 letter to BP question[ed] if hydrocarbons
may also be rushing IN to the damaged casing, instead of pouring out.
His questions were revealing, and now more relevant than ever:Are there significant deposits of oil and gas in formations above the target reservoir?
Please
provide an estimate of the total amount of oil and gas that is
contained in i) the Macondo well target formation and ii) each formation
above the target formation that could leak hydrocarbons into the annulus…
Please provide documents related to the possibility that the initial drilling encountered leakage from other formations above the target reservoir…
A May 23, 2010 article… in the Orlando Sentinel stated that well records indicate that in late February, there was a loss in drilling mud pressure. According to the article, this could mean that the mud fractured layers of sand or shale in the formation and vanished. The article goes on to state that in early March, the pressure of the oil and gas encountered overwhelmed the pressure of the drilling mud. In mid-April, a loss of drilling mud was reportedly again experienced. Do any or all of these events indicate that oil and gas could be flowing from somewhere other than the target reservoir? If so, please explain fully, and if not, why not?
How
does Conressman Markey know to pursue such unique and specific
questions about the well integrity? Previous to this letter, no mention
had been made of leakage INTO BP’s well, the possibility of oil or gas
escaping out.Markey likely already knows the answers to these
questions, but is unable to reveal this information because it is under
some level of classification.He recently made a statement to this effect on CNN: Rep. Markey says Congress unable to “PUBLICLY disclose” integrity of wellbore — More (VIDEO)
MARKEY: They have not responded. And, again, I wrote back there on June 23, so that we could publicly disclose what the integrity of the wellbore is, we could publicly disclose what the integrity of the geology around the wellbore, so that we could better understand. …
Given the heated debates as to whether or not BP's oil reservoir is becoming depleted,
what the pressure readings from the BP well mean, and whether a "static
kill" (top kill version 2.0) attempt is safe, it is crucial that we get
to the bottom of this one way or the other.
Finally, FOSL points out that - instead of Rigel gas leaking into the BP well - the BP oil spill could have leaked out through the area of the Rigel gas field:
The seeps were identified by the Joint Analysis Group and research vessel Thomas Jefferson.
The
Joint Analysis Group is comprised of the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy
(OSTP).
- Report by the Joint Analysis Group.
- Report by the R/V Thomas Jefferson.
Several
seeps southwest of the BP blow-out were first reported on June 21, 2010
by scientists aboard the R/V Thomas Jefferson. The seepage “appears to
be natural gas” (methane) according to the NOAA report.
Did these seeps exist before BP began exploration of the doomed Macondo prospect?
Former Shell Oil executive and current Berkeley engineering professor Robert Bea is “troubled that we’re just now hearing about seeps three kilometers away, because a survey of the seabed conducted before BP drilled its well didn’t indicate anything like that,” according to the Times-Picayune.
He said, “There was nothing that indicated the presence of such a seep… I wonder why we’re just now finding that out?”
Bea has “very little confidence in what’s been said publicly about the seeps.”
This
July 23 JAG report image shows areas of seepage near the BP blow-out,
with the majority appearing near the Rigel gas field. Seeps are
identified by purple cylinders:
BP blow-out = white cylinder (NOAA)
Seeps shown as ‘red and yellow columns’ & ‘purple cylinders’ in the June 21 report by the R/V Thomas Jefferson:
BP blow-out = solid bright red cylinder
I
have no idea whether or not FOSL is correct that a substantial
interaction between the blownout BP well and the Rigel gas field has
occurred. I have repeatedly noted that the oil gusher could make nearby natural seeps larger. And the crude from BP's well is 40% methane,
while crude oil usually contains only 5% methane. Is this because of a
naturally high methane content in the oil reservoir, or because BP
accidentally tapped into the Rigel field while it was drilling?
It
is better to raise the hypothesis that the BP oil well is interacting
with the Rigel field and have it debunked - or confirmed - than not to
discuss it at all ... especially since Thad Allen has raised the issue
himself.
Better yet, BP should be forced to answer Congressman Markey's questions, so that we don't have to speculate.
Numerous people have also sent me the link to Alexander Higgins' post
claiming that the large methane seep in the area of the Rigel field was
not there before BP capped its well. I have no idea whether or not
he's right (someone with better map skills and more time can let us
know).
»
- advertisements -
Well I REALLY hesitate to engage this topic on my first night back online and when I'm going to be very busy the next few days catching up but I would make a couple technical points. Those who have actually read my comments in the past will recall on several occasion I pointed out that my previous employer owned a producing gas field to the south. That field was Rigel. You may also recall I mentioned the possibility that the resultant depletion might conceivably have impacted the drilling difficulties in the Macondo well and that IF the lower casing shoe was compromised that depletion from the shallower sand could have a significant impact.
Those points are all valid and are still in play. However there would not be a serious likelihood that gas was flowing INTO the Macondo wellbore because the Rigel field has now seen significant pressure depletion; the pressure gradient would be into the Rob E interval not into the wellbore. Thus the concern is that crossflow could be occurring not that flow into the wellbore was occurring.
Finally GW - your line in the article and your post on your website that suggest there is contention over whether depletion has occurred in the Macondo reservoir still shows a lack of understanding. I've tried to explain before but you don't seem to get it - by DEFINITION the Macondo reservoir has suffered depletion. It's a mass balance question, you understand that all that oil has come OUT of the reservoir. That is DEPLETION, the question is HOW MUCH depletion has occurred. Your source that says "it's unlikely the reservoir has suffered depletion" doesn't understand what the term means.
Now Wang can immediately junk this post as 'defending BP'
Doctors = Good? Hahahahahahah!
Engineers = Good? Bwaaahahahahaha!
By the way, I'm an engineer and my sister is a surgeon. Both supposedly "good" at what they do.
Bad. Doctor, the word itself. Would you accept a doctored drink from me?
It'll get you straight to the doctor!
Ponder that Snakehead.
ORI
http://aadivaahan.wordpress.com
@ OR Indina - When is the nuke going to blow... Aug 16 still? You still stand by that Mr. Engineer? We still on red alert or did you call a stand down that I missed? Which tarot card does your PE Stamp resemble?
Not @ but sideways, out of left field @not@ Jim_Shillford.
Mr. Shillford. Have you heard of Dr. JoyKill And Mr. Hide?
Maybe you live such a life.
Shill by day and chill by night.
As if prognostication/prophecy would even tickle one of your brain cells, much less that I'd start an argument with you on the topic.
And if you'd like a reading, ask, I'll give you one, free. It just might change your life.
Meanwhile, go stand in front of a mirror, look into your eyes and say out aloud "I, Jim_Shillford am a paid disinformation Agent, putting millions at risk by murkying the waters".
Meanwhile, if you have relatives in the Northwest, Pacific that is, tell them that a tarot-card reading engineer said they should stay home on July 30th. Standby to take evasive action against an earthquake. Okay? Or tell your friends.
Do a good thing for once. You'll sleep better.
ORI
http://aadivaahan.wordpress.com
Nice to know you got your cut and paste skills down, but you're still not as good as Geo Wash.
Okay folks, you heard it .... earthquake Pac Northwest July 30th, nuke explosion GOM Aug 16th.
But dear indian, why didn't you fortell the tanker "incident" in the Straights of Hormuz? Holding out on us or did you forget to re-shuffle the deck?
Come on, a pre-K child could have forecast a tanker incident in the Straits of H sometime this summer. You really didn't need a Tarot deck for that.
Oh, look. Someone figured out how to tick the "flag as junk" link. To whoever you are, I figure it must be tough to begin realizing that you won't get your desperately hoped for asphalt volcano methane death tsunami engineered by the Rothschilds, the NWO and the Evil Lizards from Uranus. Better luck next time.
Doctors, Engineers= Good
MSM "journalists" (and the sensationalism here on this subject), financial sector, government, union= Bad
ENOUGH SAID
i will continue to feel free to speak as i see fit,
same as you.
Yes, it sucks the ocean is so vast thet they cannot find any oil.. now go on to speak or bitch,
not that you are a bitch or that if you are a bitch, that there is anything wrong with that. bitch
The junkers won, truth and science lost out at ZH... what a horribly ill-informed collection of comments from financial- non engineer types <Greyzone & snakehead excluded>.. Enjoy your bliss, (i won't say it).
Shouldn't ZH have some editorial oversite from say, an engineer (maybe an MBA!) in matters such as this??
I have hit my pseudoscience limit as well. I hate to interrupt the WTC building 7 melting steel experts that frequently post here, but prove your claims, please, or STFU. It only takes a few threads like this to turn this blog into Alex Jonestown and destroy the credibility of a great place.
If you have a video feed of a second Mitt Simmons oil leak, please post it. Otherwise, it is painful to watch you destroy your somewhat remaining credibility. GW, have you picked out a new username yet?
Wow
Nice ad hominem argument ya got there.
http://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/person.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
Yes! And a senior manager from Goldman should have editorial oversight over all financial stories!!
(But if the good folks at Goldman are busy, maybe someone from Treasury or the Fed could fill in).
GW,
An engineer has ethical standards not unlike that of a doctor; who- inspite of President B.O.'s claim, are actually not interested in cutting off your leg but taking care of the problem. Except for Government , Union, and Financial "markets" (casinos), your cynicism is not warranted.
As an engineer, I have not noticed any particular ethical standards in the industry. I will say, however, when an engineer makes a mistake (like a doctor), it is usually pretty obvious pretty quickly.
I don't know that I've ever heard such talk from an engineer.. I only know ethical people interested in building the best. Where are you residing with such type "engineers"?
I don't reside with such engineers. I review lots of proposals where engineers are seeking funding. I read lots of unsubstantiated claims. I am not bashing engineers, but just don't necessarily see them standing out as bastions of ethics. Same with scientists.
Wow, no junks. how civil.. Now, the tough one... How is directional drilling communication accomplished???? Well let me say if they can hit a well 10" in diameter 15,000 + ft down... does it stand to reason they pretty much know where they are?..it would be impossible to drill into another formation far far away. and the answer is the mud... yes, the directional drill sends its signal through the drilling mud as a basically high frequency morse code.
Junk Me! said Archimedes when the ignorant Roman soldier plunged a knife into him.
While you've been watching BP's fake oil leak, the U.S. and several other countries have been steadily gearing up for a war against Iran:
House OK's possible Israeli raid on Iran
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=136016§ionid=351020101
Congress Sends Obama New Sanctions Against Iran
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/24/congress-iran-sanctions-obama_n...
Iran is joined by Russia in condemning EU sanctions
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/terrorism-security/2010/0727/Iran-is-join...
Canada toughens sanctions against Iran
http://www.canada.com/news/Canada+toughens+sanctions+against+Iran/332374...
U.S., Israeli warships cross Suez Canal toward Red Sea
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/report-u-s-israeli-warship...
Armada of U.S. and Israeli Warships Head for Iran
http://www.prisonplanet.com/armada-of-u-s-and-israeli-warships-head-for-...
I'm not quite sure what it takes to convince people that they're being distracted so war preparations can take place unnoticed.here some more links and views..
.
http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com/2010/07/26/bp-gulf-oil-spill-fishing-waters-reopened-based-visual-observations-oil-surface-3/
.
http://tv.globalresearch.ca/content/oil-spills-unseen-culprits-and-victims
.
The latest round of independent testing of Gulf Coast waters comes from a local Alabama news station WKRG 5.
Just like before the independent water samples once again contradicts the information that the EPA is giving to the public.
The tests found astoundingly high levels of oil in both the sand and water where kids were playing along the Alabama coast even though the water appeared to be clear to the naked eye.
One of the water samples actually exploded when the chemist tested for oil. The chemists said the explosion was most likely due to methane or Corexit.
.
http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com/2010/07/17/independent-water-samples-contradict-epa-statements-explodes-tested-oil-due-methane-corexit/
Liars and charlatans...the whole rotten batch of them. As terrible as this whole sad affair has been so far, you can make a solid bet that there is much higher degree of uncertainty about the integrity of the well bore, its casing, and the actual geology in the area than any of these stooges would be willing to publicly disclose. Governments and corporations specialize in compartmentalized answers to direct questions, and outright lies if they believe that there's enough plausible deniability to keep their asses out of the fire.
For real, we need to get Wikileaks on the case here.
Interesting comments today from UGA's Joye in her weekly update - she confirmed that NOAA is not sharing all of the data and that there is little to no study being done on dissolved gas. She also took issue with NOAA's focus on corrupt data regarding DO2 stating that in the data she supplied it was reliable. She affirmed that the "plumes" are of significant size (as in miles) and that perhaps Adm. Allen in his upbeat comments about the sub surface oil are simply optimism. I am hopeful the briefing will be put on line, if not I will take some time when I have some time and provide a summary my notes.
Re: the contention that the seep wasn't there and the implication that it was caused by capping Macondo, the biggest reason they've waited so long to get static kill underway is that somebody insisted that they have a 3D survey of the area around Macondo. Now that they have it, it might settle the question about what's connected to what. If it's made public or leaked.
What if the queen had balls? She'd be the king!! Only thing certain is the public finds out the truth after the body count is extreme!!
>What if the queen had balls?
She doesn't need 'em. She's had Philip on his knees for decades.
There have been a number of interviews by a long-time oil industry investment banker, Matthew Simmons, warning of a huge potential catastrophe (i.e., millions dying along the Gulf Coast) as methane gas and oil gets stirred up by hurricane season. This guy was on the Cheney energy task force so is a credible industry insider.
Simmons has claimed that his "lake" of "black oil" is 500' thick and that the flow rate is 120,000 bbl/day. Doing the math, it had taken roughly 4038 years to fill it to its claimed size of "the state of Washington." I wish we'd get an updated estimate of size so we'd know how many years it's been flowing as of now. Simmons is credible? I think not.
He may have been credible as an investment guy/financial type but he's out to a lunch served up from well beyond the known universe when it comes to the rest of it.
GW, did you get the message...Coast Guard can't find any oil (25 bbls skimmed yesterday)...Its over, nothing to see here, keeping moving. Kobe is in China selling millions of jerseys..now thats news. GW you are doing a great job. I look forward to your posts which are well researched and balanced. I hope and pray the blowout well is killed by early August as Crown Weather is predicating a very active 2004 type hurricane season starting in Mid August. So there is a 2 to 3 week window before all work stops.
deleted, moved
...and here's another one:
http://www.mlive.com/news/kalamazoo/index.ssf/2010/07/state_of_emergency_declared_as.html
Interesting aheady.
By the way, I think your pic is really hilarious.
But how interesting eh? Spills spills everywhere. It's like OIL is saying ENOUGH.
Can we hear it? As an example, as an industrial designer with some really path-crushing ideas, I've met people the world over, CEO's of billion dollar corporations, politicians etc.
With solutions that blow them away. "Never heard/seen anything like this before" is the usual response.
http://squareandc.net
But no one has the courage to engage. Neither car companies, nor aviation companies, neither bicycle companies.
The dominant paradigm (Oil fueled) is burning so bright and hard and we are like the proverbial deer in headlights.
But GOM will not let us off the hook. Not this time.
A resonant mega-trend is upon us. 2010 began with 2 big shakes. Another one is round the corner.
As with-out, so with-in.
Be loose, agile, on your toes. We are all going to be shaken and stirred.
ORI
http://aadivaahan.wordpress.com
If they'd drilled into it, it probably wouldn't be a "seep".
What if they drilled into it far below the seafloor, but there are natural channels connecting that level of pay zone with the seafloor?
George, in reply to your question about kicking off a seep by drilling near to it, the seep is two miles away. It would have had to be a different well shaft and they'd have had to drill it in secret, without a permit. At an angle. With nobody spilling a single bean. At night, lights and engines off, in radio silence. The fact that MMS was so lame still doesn't make it plausible. And if they had, the gas would be escaping up the secret well bore, not seeping out. There's an amazing number of natural seeps in the Gulf. It's a seep.
I asked the question of a geologist at The Oil Drum (pinkfud) about how far the maximum distance for an oil seep should be given the folds and such in various strata in that area. He replied by stating that it is very folded and that seeps should not appear more than a few miles away max, with the majority being well under 1 mile distance if they occur.
Now taking that same knowledge from a geologist who claims to know that area, the chance of either Rigel interacting with Macondo or vice-versa appears to be extremely low, but not non-zero since the distance to the Rigel gas bearing strata is only "a few miles".
So since a couple miles is at the upper end of the possible ranges at which seeps would emerge, this means that such an interaction is at least theoretically possible, though highly unlikely.
Statements like yours, made with absolute certainty, are the exact same kind of sentiments that led BP to bypass safety steps because such incidents just never really happen. Well, look what did happen.
While I agree that the probability of interaction is extremely low, it is not zero as you imply. In fact, throughout this crisis, absolutist cheerleaders for BP were frequently wrong, from the 1000 gallons per day claim all the way up to the final admission of something over 50,000 BARRELS (2.1 MILLION gallons) per day. I personally don't take extremists like Matt Simmons seriously at this point but I equally distrust absolutist apologists for BP, given BP's safety record.
The wounds from Texas City remain rather raw, sir, and if it were up to me, BP would have been crucified then rather than now.
I stand 100.0% behind my contention that BP did not drill a new well into or nearby the apparent Rigel seep, which is what you're responding to. It's simply too farfetched.
If you'll look below, you'll see a different post expressing hope that the 3D survey is released, precisely because it could help determine if there may have been interaction after the well (Macondo, Well #1) was closed.
FWIW, I agree with you about Texas City.
My apologies but the general discussion has mentioned crossflow without the concept of an additional well being drilled. My point was that whatever is bubbling over a few miles cannot be absolutely ruled out without more data, such as the seismic surveys. Since we are not privy to that data, none of us are in a position to make an absolute statement ruling out such crossflows. Saying the likelihood is diminishingly small is, in my opinion, more honest and admits room for error in the unlikely but possible event that it has occurred.
Let's suppose that Well #1 tapped into a flow from the Rigel field. What relation would that have to a seep in or around the Rigel field that's 2 miles off?
I don't know ... if it tapped into Rigel half way between the Macondo well and the newly-discovered seep, at high pressures and assuming large reservoirs, could it be possible?
MORE IMPORTANTLY, WHY DOESN'T BP ANSWER CONGRESSMAN MARKEY'S QUESTIONS?
Because they are already being sued by 300 different organizations or people. They would be insane to run around babbling about what they think might have happened 2 miles or more below the water line. Its not like they have had the well under control so they could send down a logging suite to find out.
Having said that, I expect they have cross flow problems with the NG field. This well appears to be a High Pressure NG well in the middle of a oil prospect. What I want to know is why did they go after oil when the productive field nearby and at nearly the same depth was obviously a high pressure NG field.
Kind of makes ya wonder they said they were drilling an oil well there.
removed, duplicate
Re: Markey's questions, in general it's probably because they're facing criminal charges. Less said the better until compelled to and then the answers will be all lawyered up.
Because they paid $20 Billion (actually only $7 Billion in 2010 with the rest to come "later") to stop any additional uncomfortable questions.
Dude, don't hassle me, I paid at the door.
Yeah, but even Lloyds of London is now saying that the cost might be much, much higher.
The higher it goes, the more taxpayers will be bailing them out. The $20B whatever fund reduces US Treasury tax revenues by $7.5B net. That's a taxpayer bailout.
I don't quite fully understand your comment. Say we accept your $7.5B net number as correct, meaning this is the amount of taxes BP won't pay because of the $20B cleanup expense committed to already. That still leaves $12.5B net that BP does need to come up with and pay out of pocket. And any US based oil company or US subsidiary would operate under the same circumstances. The tax law always subsidizes corporate recklessness and stupidity through expense deductions.
Are you saying the tax law should be changed for BP? Are you saying BP shouldn't set aside the $20B so that it can pay the $7.5B in taxes? I read your post the other day outlining how you came up with the number. What's the point other than every company under US tax law can deduct "expenses" before calculating taxable income, even expenses caused by their own stupidity or negligence.
pretty much sums it up:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/bp-taking-10-billion-tax-credit-from-spill-2010-07-27?dist=afterbell