This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Did the BP Oil Well Really Blow Out in February, Instead of April?
Blog
The Deepwater Horizon blew up on April 20th, and sank a couple of
days later. BP has been criticized for failing to report on the
seriousness of the blow out for several weeks.
However, as a
whistleblower previously told
60 Minutes, there was an accident at the rig a month or more prior to
the April 20th explosion:
[Mike Williams, the chief
electronics technician on the Deepwater Horizon, and one of the last
workers to leave the doomed rig] said they were told it would take
21 days; according to him, it actually took six weeks.
With
the schedule slipping, Williams says a BP manager ordered a faster
pace.
"And he requested to the driller, 'Hey, let's bump it up.
Let's bump it up.' And what he was talking about there is he's
bumping up the rate of penetration. How fast the drill bit is going
down," Williams said.
Williams says going faster caused the bottom of the well to split open,
swallowing tools and that drilling fluid called "mud."
"We actually got stuck. And we got stuck so
bad we had to send tools down into the drill pipe and sever the pipe,"
Williams explained.
That well
was abandoned and Deepwater Horizon had to drill a new route to the
oil. It cost BP more than two weeks and millions of dollars.
"We were informed of this during one of the safety meetings, that
somewhere in the neighborhood of $25 million was lost in bottom hole
assembly and 'mud.' And you always kind of knew that in the back of
your mind when they start throwing these big numbers around that there
was gonna be a push coming, you know? A push to pick up production
and pick up the pace," Williams said.
Asked if there was
pressure on the crew after this happened, Williams told Pelley,
"There's always pressure, but yes, the pressure was increased."
But
the trouble was just beginning: when drilling resumed, Williams says
there was an accident on the rig that has not been reported before. He
says, four weeks before the explosion, the rig's most vital piece of
safety equipment was damaged.
As Bloomberg reports
today, problems at the well actually started in February:
BP Plc was
struggling to seal cracks in its Macondo well as far back as February,
more than two months before an explosion killed 11 and spewed oil into
the Gulf of Mexico.
It took 10 days to plug the first cracks,
according to reports BP filed with the Minerals Management Service that
were later delivered to congressional investigators. Cracks in the
surrounding rock continued to complicate the drilling operation during
the ensuing weeks. Left unsealed, they can allow explosive natural gas
to rush up the shaft.
“Once they realized they had oil down
there, all the decisions they made were designed to get that oil at the
lowest cost,” said Peter Galvin of the Center for Biological Diversity,
which has been working with congressional investigators probing the
disaster. “It’s been a doomed voyage from the beginning.”
***
On Feb. 13, BP told the minerals service it was trying to seal
cracks in the well about 40 miles (64 kilometers) off the Louisiana
coast, drilling documents obtained by Bloomberg show. Investigators are
still trying to determine whether the fissures played a role in the
disaster.
***
The company attempted a “cement squeeze,”
which involves pumping cement to seal the fissures, according to a well
activity report. Over the following week the company made repeated
attempts to plug cracks that were draining expensive drilling fluid,
known as “mud,” into the surrounding rocks.
BP used three
different substances to plug the holes before succeeding, the documents
show.
“Most of the time you do a squeeze and then let it dry
and you’re done,” said John Wang, an assistant professor of petroleum
and natural gas engineering at Penn State in University Park,
Pennsylvania. “It dries within a few hours.”
Repeated squeeze
attempts are unusual and may indicate rig workers are using the wrong
kind of cement, Wang said.
In other words,
the well may have blown out in February, and never been properly repaired. If cracks in the well
were never fully sealed, then the well may have been unstable starting
in February and continuing until the April 20 explosion. (There is substantial
evidence that there are cracks in the well now.)
Bloomberg
continues:
In early March, BP told the minerals
agency the company was having trouble maintaining control of surging
natural gas, according to e-mails released May 30 by the House Energy
and Commerce Committee, which is investigating the spill.
***
While
gas surges are common in oil drilling, companies have abandoned wells
if they determine the risk is too high.
***
On March
10, BP executive Scherie Douglas e-mailed Frank Patton, the mineral
service’s drilling engineer for the New Orleans district, telling him:
“We’re in the midst of a well control situation.”
The incident
was a “showstopper,” said Robert Bea, an engineering professor at the
University of California, Berkeley, who has consulted with the Interior
Department on offshore drilling safety. “They damn near blew up the
rig.”
In other words, not only is it possible that the well casing has been
unstable since February, but BP apparently ignored standard drilling
practices by failing to abandon the well when the natural gas began
surging too violently.
Sure, the rig didn't actually catch fire
and sink until April, but cracks in the well and dangerous natural gas
surges may mean that the well actually started blowing out much earlier.
Note 1: These new facts also add to the
massive evidence that BP has been criminally
negligent.
Note 2: They also add to questions about potential insider trading.
Note 3: I am not saying that the well has been gushing oil since
February (although oil industry expert Matthew Simmons says
that the amount of oil leaking from the riser and blowout preventer
since April 20th does not account for the massive oil plumes observed in
the Gulf). What I am saying is that the well may have lost structural
integrity and stability as early as February.
»
- advertisements -
no one knows what they are talking about because there is
no transparency when it comes to what used to be "public
information". that information comes out years later when the
public opinion is irrelevant and the statutes of limitations, for
practical purposes, has expired. as in the "world" has turned the page
and more pressing tragedy is imminent. think attention, span, mind
control and news cycle. and .... security contractors hired to limit access
for reporting and documenting purposes. and not to forget image, during
news cycle, being paramount and eclipsing safety and human health, never mind
ecology and fundamental way of life and daily sustenance nutritional
realities.
give a man a fish and he eats for a day. destroy his honored and indispensable
trade of feeding your parasitic ass and you can pay him off, eat shit, then die.
then tell him he suffers from a lack of proper university education after
you have recklessly, yet profitably, shat where you ate based on your conclusions
and schedules derived from your high priced university education.
i think that is the way it was written before the translations distorted
the original message. soon they will be reporting that crude oil and gas
are essential for proper shrimp and crab reproduction.
peas.
ps. gmo food is not food. it is shit to make you dead and to turn the
face of the continent into a scar, ongoing, of it's former dynamic living ecology.
drill babydrill.? but... perhaps you should have some idea and risk assessment
and redundant safety and containment technologies in place so as to be able
to control that which you are releasing/unleashing. call me crazy.
is this all new? the environment. what is an environment? like, the pizza
shop or the parking garage, or the penthouse and casino? ??????
and if conservation of resources inhibits markets and growth on/in a limited
domain then there is only one intelligent choice, even children understand,
but not leaders and elites?
wow. ee.
so here an obvious problem. conflicting interests. say it again.
conflict of interest. consider prop trading. clients lose, house wins.
consider b.p. and gom oil "leak" and response to contain or terminate
said "leak".
b.p. has an obvious and systemically, institutionally, dictated interest to
lie, veil, conceal, misrepresent the facts! they also have an overriding
interest when it comes to choosing whether to terminate the "leak" or
contain, as possible, the product. they are not an honest broker and
do not deserve the trust one would extend to such an entity, hence
all the condemnation of the only alternate entity, the people/government
as expressed by the administration and it's possible offerings. supremely
, court,(criminals in robes) compromised,
fraud embraced, idolatry ongoing. more cognitive chaos resulting in
the third worldification of the usa. we are all Palestinians now, even the
Israelis.
pss. reform everything or die! start with campaign finance (must be public)
and banking. (must be a utility).
imho.
never mind, move on.......
pppsss. any justice with any connection to g.s., the fed, or banking is a criminal. period.
Hey there Geo Wash. Post up those geology credentials.
The criminal negligence discussion seems like an almost tertiary concern to the main point, which is that regardless of how this happened, it happened, it's really bad, and there's a significant probability that the aggregate force of humanity is actually incapable of stopping it. It's easy and, in some ways, almost mentally soothing to blame a person or set of people for this or that, and much harder and more disconcerting to realize that this is occuring as a natural result of human organisms existing on this planet in our current state. Affecting a problem of this magnitude is going to require a reconfiguration of some deeply imbedded information in our brains.
What exactly do you mean by "tertiary"? I'm not sure I understand what you are trying to say in this context? Thanks!
To pull this back from the brink a bit, I should also note that regardless of whether criminal negligence is proven true or false, if 91 million or more barrels ultimately spills as a result of this (pretty much a certainty), then BP's entire market cap is wiped just based on EPA fines alone (ie., even if they spilled it on accident, they're still on the hook for $1100/barrel). So, in addition to everything else, any fictional assumption of BP's ability to avoid bankruptcy should be understood as just that, entirely fictional.
I'm no defender of BP. I have criticized them repeatedly on this site. As Augustus says, I'm calling out GW for writing fiction. I'm a licenced petroleum engineer in 4 states and I'm certified in well control (onshore). I've drilled over 100 wells and I know fiction when I see it. These articles by GW are based on hearsay from people who do not completely know what they are talking about. If you want to write something critical of BP, take a look at the list of assets offerred to BP by Shell. One item was a containment dome. If Shell has one on standby, why doesn't BP? And why did BP build one instead of using Shells?
I started reading ZH a couple years ago for the financial insight. After reading this fiction by GW I have to question everything else I've read on this site.
"I started reading ZH a couple years ago for the financial insight. After reading this fiction by GW I have to question everything else I've read on this site. "
You are a shill. It's guaranteed by what you write in that sentence. Shills always use this particular deflection device. Just when you were being trusted you go and write something like this. I was beginning to trust you and you lost it.
So here's one for ya. Thanks for offering the borrow a containment dome partial hangout but it's just not trustworthy.
You are a poofter with limited capabilities who quivers when Thor causes thunder. Did you sell gold after reading Rumplestilskin last night?
If I work hard and try my best can become unlimited in how much I suck at insulting people? I yearn for your infinite stupidity.
Come on man stop hogging all the glory. I want the gold medal in cheap stupid unfocused irrelavant digs.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_iJp4PsotWg
Good point. Competition or not, there is always some level of collaboration between so called rivals, especially in disasters of this magnitude. Any comments on the supertankers not being deployed from the mid east or northern Europe besides the lame Jones act excuse?
These fuckers have been ruining 3rd world countries for decades. Now that it's come "home" people are all mad.
All I can say is after the goldman email about suck it fishes and birds I hope these guys spend lifetimes being jellyfish victims and shark attack victims.
ahhh blindman, thank you for proving my point - your post appeared while I was typing mine up. . . those links are heartbreaking.
Problem with Nigeria is their government have a low regulation level.
This rejects them as a worth example of anything as a large part of the crowd here want to see BP misbehaviour as a result of too many regulations.
One guy even made out of his ass that the primary problem in Nigeria was people robbing oil (and degrading the distribution circuit system in the meantime) when it is documentated to be not. Probably relieved him in his racist mind comfort.
Nigeria does not exist here as it conflicts with what the crowd propagates on BP incident origin: too much regulation.
bleuch. forced myself to read to the end of the thread before posting, despite an almost overwhelming urge to snap back.
and I'm glad I did - there were some good counterposts, I'm going with this one from Arkadaba:
this is a financial blog, aimed at traders. . . that it is earning the trust of those that read ZH, and covering stories seemingly tangential to the main purpose of trading is both appreciated and admirable.
George Washington has been on this from the start, and obviously spends time researching, reading and trying to keep up with all that is going on in the Gulf. . . no ONE person has all the details on ANY story, and one of the great things about being able to "comment" is that knowledgeable people DO contribute here, they add to the information, and many times include links that can further add to the pool of knowledge.
I don't expect anyONE person to post every detail to anything - that's why I get my "news" from individual sites that earn my trust, incrementally. . . if I wanted a "news story" I'd go to one of those twittering reuters feedbag sources.
Again, GW is using his time to research and post here. . . cheers sir!
http://blogs.forbes.com/csr/2010/06/17/bp-nigeria-and-csr/
.
http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2010/06/16/world/NIGERIA-7.html
.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/17/world/africa/17nigeria.html
.
Great work following the BP disaster GW.
Yes it did happen in February.
god save the queen
To defenders of BP, Halliburton and Transocean:
Do you know the geology of Macondo Block 252? Do you know the Sigsbee salt and turbidite sands geology?
I didn't think so.
Come back and play when you know details ...
I'm not defending anyone.
I'm calling you out for writing fiction.
Where and when did you get your geology degree specializing in GOM geology? Was it with honors?
Where and when did you get yours?
Well engineers do not need geology degrees.
No, I'm not a degreed well engineer. But I've drilled more wells than Geo Wash and can recognize that he knows about zero about it.
Sigsbee Salt and turbitide sands are simply term applied by geologists to describe and distinguish the different layers of the subsurface formations. In order to find the oil and gas they try to figure out the geology of the region with consideration of "where did the organic material come from" and how is it trapped and then try to guess the age and maturity of the deposit. It is as complicated as you want to make it.
That has nothing to do with killing this well nor did it cause a blowout.
But it is Geo Wash who wanted to play the game of "I'm an expert." I will agree that he is GED qualified in cut and paste. Beyond that, I want to read about his PhD disertation on GOM geology.
In what capacity were you involved in drilling these wells? Did you decide where they should be drilled? Or were you involved in deciding what technology was best suited for various conditions? Or maybe risk management?
When did Geo Wash appoint you as his doppleganger inquisitioner? I was not and am not involved with the wells. So what? The guys on the rig doing the bottom kill wern't either. Did they have to choose the original location to be more knowledgeable that a cut and past expert? This well is not drilling in formations that have not been encountered in other wells.
Are you frequently misled by fairy tales? Have you traveled to another planet? Has the govt. denied you a space odyssey? Make up anything you want.
Pwned - I think I have made my point.
Ah, no. You demonstrated that you know less than Geo Wash.
And if he was interested in getting the facts out, maybe he would have referrenced Admiral Allen's statement of today wherein he seems to deny that there even is a casing problem.
http://www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com/go/doc/2931/671291/
<snip>
We know from some sonic testing that was done based on radiography equipment from the Department of Energy we have a partial closer of some of those rams but not a complete closer. And that was a problem for the top kill operation because we could not get enough pressure on top of the blow out preventer to force all of the mud down into the well bore to allow us to top kill it, if you will.
So, did he state that there was a pipe problem? Look closely.
<snip>
As you move below that and you go down into the well bore, I think that one thing that nobody knows is the condition of the well bore from below the blow out preventer down to the actual oil field itself. And we don’t know, we don’t know if the well bore has been compromised or not. One of the reasons we did not continue with top kill at higher pressures, there was a concern that if we increased the pressure too hard it might do damage to the casings and the well bore. What we didn’t want was open communication of any oil from the reservoir outside the well bore that might get into the formation and work its way to the sub sea floor and then result in uncontrolled discharge at that point. That has not happened and that’s the reason they’re taking such precautions and did not proceed any further with the top kill.
Why did the most excellent and knowledgeable journalist with the GOM geology education overlook what the people actually involved had to say? I'll take a guess. That journo was composing a BS cut and paste job from multiple websites and had no time to actually learn anything. It was good enough to get an Arkadaba into hyperventilation vapors so it must have been a success in generating some excitement. If you consider that you have made some point, be careful and don't hurt yourself with it.
It is like drilling into tiramisu under huge pressure.Not exactly stable.And dangerous too.
It was insanely risky to drill there.And the results speak for themselves.
What a nightmare.
Good work as always GW.
BP CEO sold shares
Goldensharks sold shares
Well Blew
Try and cap it
Contain it
Cant clean it up why ?
All Supertankers leased and full
Jones Act
There are 100's of millions of barrels of oil on the ocean floor
Can't put that kind of oil volume on the market
Put a Bounty of $2000 per barrel recovered
(This would bring investors & equipment from around the world)
Be cleaned up in a Jiffy
Gov can use balance (2.2KPB) to fund restoration of land and wildlife because BP is paying over $4000 per barrel
This will never happen
I will shut up now
Move along
I have a game. Who is the paid poster, and what entity pays them? Is BIGOV? Is it BP? Is it some third party?
Winners receive a better grasp of human nature. Losers get outed.
Haha - I think there may be more than one ... but at least one begins with the letter "A".
I like GW - he is functioning like a journalist - gathering and trying to verify data from divergent sources and he is been fighting the good fight for a number of years. For everyone else, I don't know. Posters offering an analysis of what is happening with off-shore drilling (from a technical POV) should post their bona fides.
One thing I will comment on - as a linguist and someone who has functioned in a corporate environment in a foreign language is that the "small people" comment *may* be being blown out of proportion. I'm reserving judgement but when operating in second language, it is possible to make huge gaffes because of linguistic and cultural differences (I have made a few myself).
Contango is a term I've not heard mentioned in a while. It would be hilarious of all the tankers around are tied up by the banks' greed.
Great post GW. Not only was BP criminally negligent but what action did the MMS take when in March BP notified them that they were in the "midst of a well control situation." Wat did the government do? If that is indeed a "showstopper" where were the regulators who were notified and were supposedly overseeing an admittedly very dangerous situation?
This article is total bullshit. George Washington, you are doing a grave disservice to this web site by writing articles like this. There is no such thing as drilling too fast. Every well is drilled as fast as possible. There is no downside to drilling fast. No one on a rig would ever say "bump it up". It's always "bumped up" as much as possible. Someone may say something like "increase bit weight", or "perform a drill-off test to see if we can increase the penetration rate." And this conversation would never take place with an electronic technician.
You seem to be saying that the well had a lost circulation problem, where the drilling fluid is lost to fractures in a formation. This is a common problem. It is not due to drilling too fast. It can be repaired with a squeeze cement job, and it is not unusual to have to do it several times.
I recently returned from a 2 month trip to the Middle East. I read all the Oil & Gas Journals that piled up while I was gone. Every issue had an extensive article on the BP blowout. Very little technical information was included in these articles. Why? Because not much is known outside BP and the Federal Government, and the Oil & Gas Journal only prints what can be factually verified.
The only criminal negligence I've seen is the BS being written on this web site.
CEO of the Sofa
@CEO of the Sofa
Go ahead, keep reading industry publications that are made by the very people who try to keep information from you. Why didn't the top kill work? Why was it even tried? Why did they just cut the pipe instead of leaving the crimp to reduce the current flow? Publications that stick to the so-called "facts" have the dual effect of providing cover to stall artists and are usually meaningless pablum because the news flow is too slow.
+++++ 7000
It is easier for them to write BS than to get an education. Wells are not P&A because of lost circulation problem until they have made many attempts to cure it.
Wouldn't it be great if posts were screened to eliminate the Maxine Waters conspiracy theories. Some of this stuff is as bad as "Guam is tilting because of too many people." I suppose, if proven true, it could be blamed on criminal negligence.
Here is some BS for you.BP ran with 6 centralizers for the cement job when halliburton insisted 21 was the minimum needed to prevent gas leakage.A simulation run with 9 centralizers showed a severe gas problem.They used six.
The BP team is criminally negligent.And this is only 1 of many errors they committed.All errors showed a tendency to reduce costs at the expense of safety...what a surprise.
Centralizers do not ensure a good cement job or cure a gas problem. Running fewer than 21 centralizers is not that big a deal. It somewhat appears that they would have had to run at least one squeeze job anyway as it appears that a formation took the cement. If you look at the mud logs you will see the signs that the people on the rig missed. They should have known of the problem and not displaced the mud with seawater. A cement bond log will certainly show the fillup behind the pipe. It will not show gas cut cement with very small channels. They should have waited longer for the cement to cure, then run the pressure test and be more observant of the mud flows. Recall that the well was under control until the mud was displaced. Check the cement and squeeze more into it if necessary. That is just the way it is safely done.
Wouldn't it be great if somebody, SOMEWHERE inside of this fiasco would give us a few fucking facts instead of filling us with bullshit and PR spin.
Maybe then we could educate ourselves.
If you want to look at the well details go to the house energy sub committee web site and down load all the data. there are daily drilling reports, well plans, mud weights, cement weight and type and volumes, caliper logs and formation logs. Charts showing the mud pump flows and pressures and volumes. As much info as you could want.
The well shows about a 65' payzone. eazy to pick out on the logs. take a look.
Prediction: possible Extinction Level Event.
If the oil content predicted as great, or greater than the Saudi oil reserves, and if the sea floor has been assaulted with extensive hydraulic fracturing by BP as thought, and if multiple leaks or gushers continue to form,
bye-bye Atlantic Ocean....
sgt_doom
"Prediction: possible Extinction Level Event."
C'mon now. Extinction level? Please. I enjoy doom and gloom as much as the next guy, but this is over the top. It's Manbearpig level.
Why not bump it up for high nonsense.
Something such as "Unnamed experts in Washington, DC have informed us that this one well is forecast to have reserves of 17.32 times all oil in Saudi. The Saudi's have already made plans to shutin all of their production if this well can be saved."
Another possibility is that the reserves are so large and the blowout so powerful that the sea floor will start caving in. Once the cave in starts it will be uncontrollable and will become the zipper that expands to cut a new Florida Strait and crosses the Atlantic. It will finally allow the mantle of the earth to seperate from the core and the mantle will shift. All it takes is an unlimited and unending supply from a 65' pay zone.
It really is going to make you sorry that you did not jump on Hale-Bop when you had the chance.
Bye-Bye GoM, yes. As to the Atlantic, the Eastern Seaboard was already a cesspool within 20 miles of the Coast. Not all pollution is visible, but even twenty years ago, there were syringes and other medical wate washing up on the beaches. The water in the Hamptons is God's vengeance on Wall St., and has been for a long time. Most Wall Street investment bankers will openly state that the lavish bonuses are the only reason for putting up with living in Tri-State. Without money, the whole thing would/will come down.
P.S. Does anyone have any idea what the human fecal matter concentration is in these waters? (About three turds per cubic foot.) The oil is merely the visible manifestation of a disaster of population that has been developing for 50 years.
I'm seeing an awful lot of "BP notified the MMS..." in this story. Doesn't that absolve them of criminal negligence (or better yet make the Federal Government complicit in the criminal negligence)?
I agree they pushed the envelope and attempted to cut some costs, but as long as they were above the regulatory minimum and kept the regulator informed of the developments with the well, I fail to see how they crossed the line of criminal negligence.
Any lawyers out there care to weigh in on this?
I'm wondering why we're not seeing Haliburton's name mentioned more often, since the cementing/sealing is what they apparently were responsible for. If the problems turn out to have begun months earlier than BP has acknowledged, and if those problems were of the same type that caused the ultimate blowout (i.e. high-pressure gas going where they didn't want it to), it would seem to support the charge of BP criminal negligence, and likely more responsibility for Haliburton.
Haliburton is only responsible for the execution of the job. There is no guarantee of outcome. It is up to the owner / operator to check the results. If the job does not accomplish the purpose, Haliburton will run another one for them and send them another bill. And a third or fourth if necessary. Your comment, along with so many others here, just illustrates that people can fire their cannons without regard to the load.
It could've happened to anybody.
Didn't you ever get excited and drill something a little too hard?
You apologize after and move on.
But Hayward will not "really truly honestly swear-to-God crocodile tears" apologize until the internal investigation is complete. So you're talking about alleged hard drilling. :>)
BTW I have this vision of Hayward dropping to his knees and asking God why life's so unfair because those 11 dead rig workers were a tragic accident. This is of course once his assistant woke him from dreaming about spurting GOM wells. He was deeply moved, particularly when he was on the throne later that morning and that bad Chinese food was "moving" through the "bowel system".
How moving. Thank God he just installed one of those fancy Japanese toilets with the cooling water streams and warm air drying.
Cognitive Dissonance
"This is of course once his assistant woke him from dreaming about spurting GOM wells."
How Freudian.
Hard drilling, yes I was.
I think a lot of people in the US are misreading Hayward's Britishness for arrogance.