This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
BP's Relief Well Is Not a Slam Dunk
Blog
The team leader for BP's relief wells - Boots and Coots - is 40 for
40 in successfully stopping oil spills using relief wells (around
6:10 into video).
Many oil drilling experts are hopeful that BP's relief wells will
succeed on the first try. I hope and pray that they do.
But the relief wells are not a slam dunk, especially at such extreme
depths.
CBS News states:
"It's not a solid dunk," said Eric Smith, a deepwater drilling expert. "It's going to take some work."
Smith said two things could go wrong. The cut could miss the broken
wellbore, and BP would just try again, or engineers could drill into
hidden gas pockets."When you are drilling into that you have to be careful of a kick, a blowout in the relief well," Smith said.
George
Hirasaki, a Rice University professor in chemical and biomolecular
engineering who was involved in the Bay Marchand oil containment effort
for Shell, said engineers have to be very careful when drilling into
any formation that has hydrocarbons, which poses the risk of the same
type of explosion that destroyed the rig.
Recently-retired Shell Oil President John Hofmeister said
that the well casing below the sea floor may have been compromised,
which could render success from the relief wells less certain:
[Question]
What are the chances that the well casing below the sea floor has been
compromised, and that gas and oil are coming up the outside of the well
casing, eroding the surrounding soft rock. Could this lead to a catastrophic geological failure, unstoppable even by the relief wells?
John Hofmeister: This is what some people fear has occurred. It is also why the "top kill" process was halted.
If the casing is compromised the well is that much more difficult to
shut down, including the risk that the relief wells may not be enough. If
the relief wells do not result in stopping the flow, the next and
drastic step is to implode the well on top of itself, which carries
other risks as well.
Hofmeister subsequently told MSNBC:
The question is whether
there is enough mechanical structure left at the base of the reservoir
to hold the cement when they start pouring cement in [from the relief well].***
The more oil we some coming out, the more it tells you that the whole casing system is deteriorating. The fact that more oil would be coming out rather than less oil, would suggest that the construction within the pipe is offering no resistance whatsoever, and we’re just getting a gusher.
Yesterday, the Guardian quoted the government official in charge of oil spill response as warning:
“There is a chance – a slight chance – they could nick the wellbore,” Thad Allen, the coast guard commander, said. …
A
nick risks starting a new small leak or possibly even a collapse of a
section of the pipe given that it was damaged in the explosion in ways
still not fully understood.
***
The intercept could
be complicated if it turns out that the oil is flowing around the pipe,
between the pipe and the cement of the well bore.
And Spiegel previously reported that there are many dangers with completing the relief wells:
Independent experts warn that relief wells, like any well, are not without risk. "More
oil could leak than before, because the field is being drilled into
again," says Fred Aminzadeh, a geophysicist at the University of
Southern California. Ira Leifer, a geochemist at the University of
California in Santa Barbara, voices similar concerns: "In the worst
case, we would suddenly be dealing with two spills, and we'd have twice
the problem."
***
As straightforward as it
sounds, this approach [i.e. killing a spill by drilling relief wells]
has not always been easy to implement in the past. The disaster in the
Timor Sea, for example, ended in a debacle. It took engineer five tries
to even find the borehole under the sea floor. Shortly before the end,
the West Atlas oilrig went up in flames, after all.
***
[David Rensink, incoming president of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists] is particularly concerned that BP,
in drilling the relief wells, will penetrate into precisely those rock
formations in which extreme pressure and temperature conditions
facilitated the April blowout in the first place. Gas bubbles and
gushing oil from the depths are real possibilities. "Any relief or kill
well needs to be drilled with more caution than the first well," Donal
Van Nieuwenhuise, a geologist at the University of Houston, told the
New Orleans daily Times-Picayune. "You don't want a repeat performance.
An oil industry geologist adds:
[There are] lots of potential complications [in
drilling relief wells]. A big one would be using too high a mud
weight/pump pressure and fracturing thwe rock around the [relief well]
and losing it. Also instead of the mud building a tall colume inside
the well bore and stoping the flow it might escape out of ruptured
[casing] or failed [cement] shoes. Then they might not ever be able to
build enough back pressure to stop the flow. I suspect many of these
possible problems won't reveal themselves until the actual kill process
begins.
As CBS notes, even BP is no longer expressing full confidence:
BP leaders have showed supreme confidence in their relief wells.
"I fully expect that the well itself will be shut off in August," said Bob Dudley, BP's point man on the spill.
But recently? More caution.
"The drilling of relief wells, there's nothing guaranteed," Dudley said.
Indeed, the veteran engineer in charge of the Ixtoc Gulf oil well disaster in the 1970's states that - given the pressures involved - a single relief well might not be enough:
Carlos Osornio, a Mexican engineer in charge of
Pemex's deepwater drilling operations during the Ixtoc crisis, said BP
may ultimately find that both relief wells are needed to contain the
gusher.
"One relief well may not be enough to contain the high volume (of oil flow), but two will work for sure," he said.
Similarly, former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich previously noted:
A petroleum engineer who’s worked in the oil industry tells me [that] a recent blow-out off the coast of Australia required five pressure relief wells to successfully shut it down.
For the above reasons - and given BP's track record of incompetence - I am hopeful, but not 100% confident that BP's relief wells will succeed.
- advertisements -
CD,
BP's record stands for itself, a dismal one that is verified:
http://abcnews.go.com/WN/bps-dismal-safety-record/story?id=10763042
I will plan first and wait to see what results they bring later. Expecting more than what we have been getting from these guys has proved to be unwise. I still believe we are dealing with a well casing that has lost containment and is causing the fissures that have been previously reported.
"He who panics first looses least"
I'm not supporting BP. I'm saying that we have little choice but to wait and see since the government has agreed to let BP run the show.
Until then make friends with a canary and keep it with you.
Looking at canary futures.
I just read Janet Napolitano is taking over BPs website:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gngCCMfsrjuHI1g0taKDRL...
Back in April BP had an "emission incident" at a Texas refinery that lasted 40 days. Check out the list of compounds in the massive exposure to the local population, including the lovely benzene. Ewwwww:
http://www.propublica.org/documents/item/bps-40-day-emissions-event
Here's Glenn Greenwald, the massive thorn in Cass Sunstein's side, on BP.gov:
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/07/05/bp/index.html
Here's a July 4th beach report from Alabama. People are swimming because someone didn't have enough red flags to indicate the water isn't safe. People act in confusion when it should be obvious. They have to be told, to their face, taken out to the beach and shown, "See that. It's oil. It's not black sand. It's oil."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWeh2_aZ1DM
Wonder if felony charges will apply...
thanks for the video links WaterWings. . . just head-shake at the "condos didn't have enough red flags" to put out (two instead of one!). . .
begs the question: is anyone in charge?
(and it's cool, I already know the answer. . .)
More peeps with cams. Frequent military patrols practically rolling on people's toes...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GpEM4HYsIYY
its a whole new wave in outdoor gas chambers and free mass suicide. Bring a friend and share the same hospital bed.
Come and watch the plants die. next best land use for gulf will be grave sites, munition dumps, garbage dumps and explosive testing.
I forgot, excellent hazmat training site and enemy combatant enclosure where even the bugs die early.
How long and how deep were those 42 relief wells? Without knowing this I'm not sure how relevent this perfect record is.
Slam dunks blown....even by the best http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djfrU_AdU-w
Those articles are all a bit sensational. GW - How come you didn't post any articles for balance - ie when a relief well works?
The fact is that they are going to intercept the well BELOW the casing. They will be killing the well BELOW the casing.
The reason they had a blow out in the first place was because of malfunctioning BOPs, and apparently poor decision making by the both the rig crew and the engineer on the rig. What exactly is going to cause that rare set of circumstances to happen again?
All of these "worst case" scenarios that you are posting are exactly that - If somehow ALL fo the same events occur again we'll have another blowout. It's sensational and ridiculous to think there will be another blow out.
All along this has been the only real method of killing the well. This is the one that will work. If they miss the well, they pull out the big grey eraser, wait a couple days sidetrack - Delays the well by a week and try again. NOT A BIG DEAL. VERY COMMON. TOTALLY EXECTED WHEN JOINING TWO WELLS 18.000 FT DEEP. There is no certainty where the well is - unless they Gyro'd the whole well which is highly doubftul.
Yea , George whats wrong with you? Dont you know you always got to leave a sucker feeling good? Each time i visit the oildrum i come away like i been at NBC. Its all ok . Its ok for the dead fish and birds cause we wont mention them, they dont matter. And the fisher man will die from the gasses, no need to worry about them. Look how busy the doctors will be, aint that great
Lets see, the good side of this that George failed to present, where is it?
Was the air too clean and this fixed it? Too many fish and this is a good way to cull the herd?
The businesses and tourist were tipping over Florida and this is the balance we needed?
Broken Trades, where is the balance? Will 40 good interceptions make up for losing the Super Bowl?
I don't consider it sensationalism. I'd rather know what could go wrong than what could go right. "Preparing for the best" is not how the saying goes. I know your intent is honest and fair, but no need to speak ill of GW's presenting the possibilities.