The Relief Wells Are Ahead of Schedule … But Will They Work?

→ Washington’s

Blog

By all reports, BP is ahead of schedule in drilling the relief wells. In fact, BP will likely complete the first relief well this month.

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.

Indeed:

“If
it was shallow water, it wouldn’t be anything serious,” said Don Van
Nieuwenhuise, director of Petroleum Geoscience Programs at the
University of Houston.

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.

Similarly:

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.

Indeed, Hofmeister told Chris Matthews today that he hopes the relief well has a 50-50% chance of being successful [see my blog for video; I removed here to correct formatting problems].

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,” Donald
Van Nieuwenhuise, a geologist at the University of Houston, told the
New Orleans daily Times-Picayune. “You don’t want a repeat performance.

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.

In addition, as I’ve previously pointed out, BP’s oil gusher is producing a lot of gas.

Bloomberg has an article today adding some details:

The
cap will help BP contend with the particularly strong upward force
created by the vast natural gas reservoir that feeds the Macondo well,
[David Pursell, a managing director with Tudor, Pickering, Holt &
Co. in Houston] said. The new seal may be able to restrict the amount
of leaking mud, creating back-pressure that will more successfully
contain the gas, he said.

***

The Macondo well produces about 100 million cubic feet of natural gas a day. [I had estimated 290 million cubic feet a day, based on the U.S. Geological Survey's flow rate group's estimates of the oil flow - and see this - and the flow rate group's calculation
that 2,900 cubic feet of natural gas are escaping for every barrel of
oil.] “That’s a big well, anywhere in the world,” Pursell said. Natural
gas in a well can provide the same effect that gas in a bottle of soda
does, forcing liquid — in this case oil — out of the top at a higher
speed.

The strength of the gas could push the mud up and out of the well, he said.

To
prevent the mud from rushing out of the well, BP will try to find a mud
that is heavy enough to outweigh the pressure of gas coming out of the
well, said Les Ply, a Houston-based geologist who has participated in
kill operations in the past.

An appropriate balance must be
struck — if the mud is too heavy, the rocks around the reservoir can be
cracked or overburdened, he said. “Mud will take the path of least
resistance. You want the path to be up the well bore,” he said.

Finding
the right pressure and mud weight can be challenging for killing a well
at this depth, because there’s an additional pressure dynamic created
by the 5,000 feet of water bearing down on it, said Van Nieuwenhuise.

“It’s
water, so it won’t patch itself,” he said. The goal will be to slow the
mud flow enough to plug the well adequately so that cement can be
poured in and set, Van Nieuwenhuise said.

Hopefully, the relief wells will work. But if not, I wouldn’t recommend nuking the leaking well.

Comments

[gasmiinder]

Still no methane hydrate tsunami?

[Tree of Liberty]

Regarding Major Wellbore Problems with Relief Wells

http://www.financialsense.com/contributors/stephen-rinehart/bp-hard-cap-...

Here is an excerpt of the article

I did not post this article to the Internet several weeks ago as I was waiting to see who would state the actual well head blowout pressure was 40,000 psi (not just some wild range of 20,000 psi to 100,000 psi). For several weeks this specific number was not mentioned on oil spill websites until I heard a video on the website www.rense.com on July 01 (Thursday) by a Mr. Lindsay Williams (appears to have been pulled or unavailable “Guests 6-28-10 thru 7-4-10) who stated that his “oil source” said the wellhead pressure has now been measured at 40,000 psi (use your own discernment on this one). Mr. Williams also stated there were fissures/cracks and that if not stopped the well could flow for another 30 years (implying some 675 billion barrels of oil in a super reservoir or it is being produced within earth’s mantle and flowing into reservoir from underneath as abiotic oil). A reservoir of this size would be several orders above any public disclosures by BP or the US Government.

Summary:

1. There is no question that what BP/Adm Allen is calling a “Hard Cap” or “Overshot Device” is a specially designed and fabricated high pressure cylindrical vessel to initially mate with flanges on current BOP while a bottom kill with relief wells are being drilled/attempted. If the bottom kill is successful that these heavy-walled pressure vessels could replace the BOP on Macondo as well as possibly serve as a “BOP” on both relief wells being drilled since they also can hit high pressure gas.
2. Pressures of 40,000 psi could fracture thousands of feet of a granite rock cap once crack propagation are initiated into the granite cap thru a deep drilling program. The problem is once a crack is initiated in rock within a high pressure formation the cracks can propagate both horizontally a large distance (think shale oil) as well as vertically at relatively small pressures. Thus, we can have high pressure oil and gas coming into the well bore well above the bottom of the well (i.e., at the bottom of the 18-inch casing
3. A very high blowout pressure may explain some mud or oil flow possibly observed in cracks outside the immediate well bore area and the fact that the Thomas Jefferson noted some anomalies around the well bore in a recent survey. If the well is relatively free-flowing thru the current BOP (path of least resistance) there may be only a limited flow thru these outside cracks and fissures. This does not resolve the issue reported by Matt Simmons on CNBC (with Dylan Ratigan) that there is another area of a major blow-out miles away from what we are being shown.
4. The idea of using a high pressure cylindrical vessel maybe to adjust the relief valves at the top of the vessel (option not available with current containment dome or damaged BOP), until a slight oil/gas flow is initiated thru the fissures (surrounding the immediate well bore) and start a massive mud injection to try and seal these fissures before attempting the final bottom kill. This may require an “aircraft carrier full of mud” and so we may have had to wait until the Loch Rannoch was on site and possibly retrofitted with large mud pumps. It would be a major unknown as to what size these fissures are and how deep they run (but over 10,000 ft) so one would need a significant capacity of additional mud.
5. If this BP pressure vessel is being designed to withstand 40,000 psi internal pressure using a super strength steel (or K-Monel), BP/Gov did indeed drill a well beyond 20000 ft TOD and probably into a major abiotic oil reservoir where the blowout pressure exceeded 26,660 psi (20,000 psi rated API flange and assuming a 1/3 increase to ultimate plastic limit state design = 20,000 + 6660 = 26660 psi).
6. If the pressures in the bottom of the Macondo well bore exceed 27,000 psi there is no attempt probably being made to drill a relief well into the bottom of this well bore. It would buckle any drill string and you are risking another catastrophic failure by exceeding all known rated API safety flanges unless some special high pressure flanges and valves have been fabricated in past 50 days (cannot drill into high pressure well without proper safety equipment and this one is something not seen before). What has to be done is to intercept the well bore at a much higher point (much larger well bore area) where the pressures will be below 20,000 psi and preferably below 15,000 psi. Unfortunately, this makes sealing the Macondo well a low probability success as the well bore may already have been sandblasted open and major cracks have propagated horizontally at the bottom of the well. So it all comes down to what the well bore pressure/temperature is at along the entire well bore, how many high pressure zones are in play, how much of the granite cap is fractured, and what is the topography along the well bore. Has the Mississippi Canyon wall been fractured?
7. The Macondo Well has all the earmarks (based on current response, length of time to drill the relief wells, high pressure hard cap designs/fabrication) of being a super high pressure blow-out that is into the earth’s mantle. The “red oil” that is being seen floating on the GOM surface could be from the earth’s mantle (Where is the chemical signature for this oil after 70 days?). If this well had only been in the range of 14,500 psi well bore pressures, we would have already drilled the relief well and sealed it off (by day 40 at the latest with 7000 barrels of mud). However, since this has not happened, one can assume the situation is in a transition of going from very bad to worse with maybe three options left. Try and seal it with massive amount of super heavy mud (try and seal cracks/fissures) while attempting to adjust the well bore pressures with a massive cylindrical pressure vessel(s) on both relief wells and Macondo, attempt to seal it (way down-hole) with a small nuke if the granite cap is not fractured (maybe start with one-kiloton weapon), or let it flow for thirty+ years and contaminate the world’s oceans/environment (unacceptable or not?!). If the granite cap is badly fractured this could preclude using a 10-kiloton nuke (or any weapon to try and seal well bore) near the bottom of the well bore. If bottom kill does not work, this mega-disaster has implications of biblical proportions because there may not be an option other than trying to capture as much oil as possible with fleet of specifically-designed super tankers (both clean-up and separation/storage) for decades to come.
8. There were technical discussions decade ago about how to separate “red oil” from its environment so it could be produced (Canada has significant amounts of red oil) (see also: “Slipping Out of Oil Noose” by Larry Elgin and Dr Stephen Rinehart www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?Article_ID=22911, May 21, 2001).
9. Question of implementing a massive oil containment in Florida Keys (last “choke point” before entry into Atlantic Ocean) needs to be addressed now by World Governments to try and contain the oil from spreading into Atlantic Ocean and beyond. Possibly the only Command and Control Structure left to manage this effort is within DOD itself lead by US Navy. Oil tar balls are being reported at Jensen Beach on Florida’s East Coast (already getting late in the day). Assets need to be mobilized worldwide.
10. Air quality issues are and will continue to be a major issue despite no real information forthcoming from USGS. There is currently a hot pipe (i.e., BP well blow-out) running through a massive methane hydrate formation (1200m thick?) that is possibly heating the formation and venting large amounts of methane gas underwater in addition to the one-half ton of methane being produced by the well for each ton of oil (ref; Dr Samantha Joye – Univ. of Ga. Researcher aboard RV Walton). This could be the real origin of the massive underwater methane/oil plumes and it there maybe more than one major source. NOAA/EPA has two codes for running Air Quality predictions (in fact there are several options/predictions being run). The output of a code from OILSPILL (surface oil) is input to AIRMAP to prediction onshore concentrations of benzene, hydrogen sulphide and methylene chloride depending on actual wind son data. Where are the predictions and IVV/validations by independent Universities of air quality on Gulf of Mexico (numerous websites have commented on total lack of data other than TV station in New Orleans)? Benzene is a known carcinogen (unsafe at 10 ppb or less) and hydrogen sulphide can cause deaths at 3000+ ppb. It is a major irritant and dangerous at levels of 50 ppm.

[gasmiinder]

Of course - I don't know why I bother trying to explain it to a "20 yr veteran" of the industry who apparently buys into an article that claims a well in this location has REACHED THE FRICKING MANTLE!

Just FYI folks - that's another tinny little sign of utter ignorance. 

[Jim_Rockford]

He'll have plenty to discuss "offline" tomorrow at the office.

[gasmiinder]

Dude

We KNOW the reservoir pressure was less than 12,150 psi because the well did not blow out when they drilled into it with a mud weight that generates that pressure.  We know that 14.3 lb mud (which generates 13,300 psi at this depth) caused the mud to flow INTO the formation.  These are physical FACTS derived from publicly available data.

Let me also give you some PHYSICAL FACTS that can be obtained from any textbook. 

To calculate the hydrostatic pressure P=0.433 x density in g/cc x Depth - since seawater avg density is 1.026 and the depth is 5025' then the hydrostatic pressure at the wellhead is about 2175 psi.

To calculate the pressure due to the rock overlying the reservoir the formula is P = 0.433 x average density of the rock in g/cc x depth.  Now the average density of rock varies and we don't have a density log to integrate BUT in hard rock areas the commonly assumed result is 1.0 psi/ft.  These rocks are softer and should be less dense but we want to be cautious and assume higher levels.  Using 1.0 psi/ft for overburden you get 13,000 psi due to overburden pressure.  Add in the 2175 psi of hydrostatic at the seabed and you get 15,000 psi.  Okay let's add another 20% for error (not needed) and you get 18,000 psi.

What this means is that if the reservoir had 18,000 psi pressure it would crack the overlying rock and flow upward.  You also need to understand that this is ALL the energy originally available to push oil upward.  It is a physical IMPOSSIBLITY for the wellhead pressure to exceed 18,000 psi.  It violates conservation of energy.  Further, the energy available in the reservoir (measured at 12,100 psi) must lift the column of oil 13,000 ft to the seafloor - the weight of that column means that energy is used up - and the wellhead pressure MUST be lower than 12,100 minus that weight.

MORE IMPORTANTLY - what this means is that ANYONE no matter what title proceeds their name, who claims higher wellhead pressure than 13,000 psi CANNOT be credible.  This is not an issue of politics, or supporting BP or believing in conspiracies etc.  It is an issue of pure physics that should be understood by any first year geophysicist or second year petroleum engineer.  Any first year physics student should understand it once given the proper constants.  ANYONE who claims over 13,000 psi wellhead pressure IS NOT CREDIBLE because they are claiming a physical impossibility.

[Jim_Rockford]

Gasmiinder - Awesome post .... YOU ROCK.  I appreciate the time, effort, and ultimate futility of your post.  Wish I could buy you a beer .....

[Augustus]

If you Have devoted yourself to the collection of BS,

You have hit the a gold mine source.

There is NO GRANITE CAP in this well.  Get a clue.

[Tree of Liberty]

This is just more data that as you know does not jive with the current company/.gov line. The pressure kicks that we are hearing about coincide with what this man is suggesting with the 40,000 psi pressures being suggested here and elsewhere.  As you know there is no commercial API rated pipe and flange sets that exist currently for such a purpose at such a high flow rate. 

[Augustus]

What you posted was not data.

There has never been a well that drilled into 40,000 psi pore pressure.  Anyone who has written that is full of nonsense. 

Pore pressure is a function of depth and pressure of overburden.  It is about 0.8 lb/ft.  There just cannot be much variance from that.  Sure, it can be + - 10% but that is all.  If there was 40,000 psi at 18,0000 ft it would have already blown through the overburden.  If you are addicted to nonsense, listen to Richard C. Hoglan on Coast to Coast here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3_23PFnTZ8

It is all BS, but skip to about 3:20 and listen for a while.  It is all absolute BS.  On the Radia.  And he Missed he Hale Bop evacuation opportunity?

[wang]

Chicken Salad?

Windmills kill more birds

Environmental groups are gloating over the conviction last week of Syncrude Canada Ltd., which now faces fines totalling $800,000 for failing to prevent the deaths of 1,606 ducks that alighted on a company tailings pond two years ago.

Yet the fact a great many more birds and bats are mangled by wind turbine blades each year draws scant attention, much less prosecution. This double standard highlights the widespread misperception that so-called "renewable" energy sources do not demand environmental trade-offs...

http://www.nationalpost.com/todays-paper/Windmills+kill+more+birds/32185...

[Augustus]

I have some friends that shot about 1,600 ducks last year.  They haven't paid anything except for a hunting permit.  Syncrude should just put on a duck fry.

If more ducks shit in your water supply, will you live longer?  Do you put duck shit in your water filter at home?

[gasmiinder]

What is truly a coverup?  Why is this disaster of this magnitude?  By way of the Canadian press:

http://www.financialpost.com/Avertible+catastrophe/3203808/story.html#ix...

[Tree of Liberty]

CNN: 128 BP oil cleanup workers sickened in Louisiana; Told not to go to public hospitals (VIDEO)

BP latest despicable act, there is no truth in them at the PR and management levels.

http://www.floridaoilspilllaw.com/cnn-128-bp-oil-cleanup-workers-sickene...

They are not to be trusted.

[Augustus]

Why post the same bag of Bull Suppository three times?

[CD]

@ cougar_w

Interesting, if anecdotal, view of longer-term effects of marine oil spills

http://blogs.aljazeera.net/americas/2010/07/07/effects-brazilian-oil-spill-10-years

MSM follow-up to YouTubers and bloggers claiming oil is constantly deposited in layers on sandy beaches, covered with each tidal cycle (or by BP-leased dumptrucks)

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gIXWYBTpLtSayJtg41LKXpxSxVPAD9GQD7Q00

[Augustus]

***

[Gordon_Gekko]

I am willing to bet that the relief wells WON'T work - because (due to what has happened IMHO) they CAN'T work. Like the "top kill" this relief well operation will turn out to be just another propaganda exercise to keep the public in the dark as long as possible.

[gasmiinder]

That is an utterly empty comment.  CAN"T work?  WHY not?

People continue to believe that the casing has some big import on how the relief wells work.  PEOPLE - MOST BLOWOUTS OCCUR BEFORE THE CASING IS RUN.  Relief wells USUALLY go into open wellbores.

[Augustus]

The condition of the long string in this well has little bearing on how the kill well will work.  People who know nothing abut it are fearful.  The thing will be filled with 1,000 ft of cement to include the now junk string within it.

[ATG]

The former head of Shell American suggested the 33 wells shutdown in the Gulf were safe and the Six-month moratorium without new permits will only lead to higher energy prices and more politics.

(Bonus NBC/CNBC hyperbole about a rogue BP Libya offshore drilling deal quid pro quo for the Lockerbie bomber release and trading with Iran.)

Whatever happened to suck and salvage?

Higher gasoline prices ahead?

http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232/?video=1538691947&play=1m 8:17

[Gordon_Gekko]

We're not being told the whole story about this disaster. They don't levy $40,000 fines for simply reporting in a disaster zone.

[Tree of Liberty]

+1 Gordon

"We're not being told the whole story about this disaster."

The truth refutes most all statements and pledges BP has made thus far, why would an assertion on a slam dunk relief well intercept be any different.  They are still hiding volumes....

[Augustus]

The truth is that almost everything you post has been refuted.  You still will not explain your claim of 14% methane a Venice, LA.  Why are you hiding the facts?  Did they hold a fire works event with that concentration?

You know that they are hiding volumes bvecause you know the real volumes are . . . ?  And you can prove it because you have what information, exactly?  Or are you lying about what you know and can confirm with facts?

If you are not lying, give us the real information and the verifiable sources.  Why be involved in a cover up of the truth?  Don't hide your sources like the cover up media.  Post your truth and the full information.  Where are those fissures that you know are leaking?  I don't want you to be involved in a cover up.   Give us the coordinates.  I've got 10,000 to spend to check your spot.  If there is not fissure leak there, I want you to give me 20,000 back.  Pretty normal for oil exploration.  but you are certain of the fissures and 100,000 bopd from them.  get rich on the offer.

[Jim_Rockford]

Who made an assertion on a slam dunk relief well intercept?

[Gordon_Gekko]

Somehow Halliburton had the foresight to buy Boots and Coots RIGHT BEFORE the oil well blow-up.

http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/investing/halliburton-snaps-up-boots-and-coots/19435689/

Well, I guess that's not really surprising in a nation which goes after Saddam Hussein to punish Osama Bin Laden.

[Augustus]

That is the 16th time you have reported that Hallibuton now owns Boots and Coots.

Did Bagbad Bob give you his special ability for making news?

[Thoreau]

Injecting more mass into the existing casing via the relief well seems like it will increase the density, and thus increase the pressure. If this is the case, the seals in the existing casing are sure to blow out at some point; which ironically, may greatly REDUCE the flow at the riser.

The fissures that everyone is so worried about could act as a containment system at those depths. The question is how much residual oil/gas will find its way up to the sea bed?

[gasmiinder]

The lowest burst pressure casing string is 22,000# burst rated.  It will require LESS than 13,000# to kill the well.  What is it that is so hard to understand here?

Also - the pressure is hydrostatic people.  That means at any given depth it is the same in all directions.  As you go deeper it gets higher.  That's how it works.

[RichardP]

... it will increase the density, and thus increase the pressure.

The majority of the pressure from the mud will be up and down, not side to side.  If the mud pressure down becomes too great and overcomes the oil pressure up, the mud will escape into the oil bed from which the oil is flowing.  Given that the mud has this easy "out", it is not likely to push the casing seals to the point of blowout.

[Augustus]

Do you even try to understand the hydraulics of the well?

When it was being drilled there was drilling mud in the hole from sea level to bottom.  that mud circulated up the hole, through the casing you claim will now blow out.  Once the pressure of the kill mud reaches the formation pressure, the same pressure they used to control the well while drilling, the flow will stop.  That pressure is in the range of 12,500 psi on the bottom, and the higher up the hole you go, the less pressure from the mud weight.

There is no evidence of fissures.  however, once the well is killed, the source feeding them would be gone.  Any oil in shallow formations will simply lay there as it would have to overcome the water pressure to come out.  If the drive from the bottom is gone, it will stay in place, if it is there at all.

[Thoreau]

Disgustus,

You're an idiot, so I'll be kind and keep it simple. The mud they pump will NOT immediately equalize the pressure - if at all. The mud pushed in will be forced up the existing casing. The density WILL increase along with the pressure.

And that 12.5kpsi you keep quoting; this from the same source that claimed only 1k bpd?

[Jim_Rockford]

The mud pushed in will be forced up the existing casing

I'll jump in here.... what happens when the column of mud grows vertically up the inside of the existing casing?

The density WILL increase along with the pressure.

The density of what will increase?  The mud?

And that 12.5kpsi you keep quoting; this from the same source that claimed only 1k bpd?

What then is the real reservoir pressure?  Please provide source.

If you are feeling brave, please go duplicate your post over at theoildrum.com.  I could use a good laugh. [edit] - nevermind, I just read gasmiinder's smackdown below.  Best laugh I could have imagined.

[Tree of Liberty]

All that you are saying is true Augustus if the data were fully credible ( I cannot accept an unaudited strip of paper when all that they have stood behind thus far have been lies of great magnitude), so I appreciate your adding to the debate here from the inner workings of hydraulics and depth. 

My concern is that the data is skewed to support relief well kill potential, so I do hope your correct.  However, they have lied about so much that this appears to be a time buying exercise.

[Augustus]

Please state exactly what you have found to be a BP lie about the condition of this well.

[Tree of Liberty]

"That pressure is in the range of 12,500 psi on the bottom, and the higher up the hole you go, the less pressure from the mud weight."

Even if the 12,500 psi pressure is correct in this formation and I do not believe it is as the weakest link casing liner has a burst pressure of 22,000 psi which supports expert oilmen who have inside information that is countering the BP claims of all is well. The casing is damaged/meaning it has lost containment from pressure kicks and the erosion of an unmitigated flowing well of 100,000 BPD.  This is nothing anyone has any experience in repairing, period.  You believe every word BP and its subordinates spew in the form of non peer reviewed assertions.  Look at the entire picture Augustus.  I want this fixed also but we have to accept what we are dealing with first before we can approach a repair strategy, but there are simply few remedies that offer any real solutions for high success percentages.  From the Oil Industry side of things we are beyond our capability of technology to solve this (with a high probability solution) otherwise this would have not happened to begin with. 

[Augustus]

You can examine the pore pressure logs provided by BP.  About 12,500 psi for the pay zone is what they show.  I doubt that you have troubled yourself to do that, even though I have given you the links several times.  And the change in pore pressures as they drilled into the pay zone is pretty interesting.  It could have been one of the contributing factors in having a bad cement job.  From memory, the logs indicate they were using 14.2 ppg mud giving them about  13,300 psi on bottom at 18,100 ft.  That difference pretty big can could cause formation breakdown within the bottom of the hole.  however, it seems to me that if it actually took the mud they would have recognized it over the several days that drilling was suspended for logging and running pipe.

As the drilling progresses down the hole different strings of casing are run.  the final several strings were liners.  Each string is landed to that the Top of Casing is 50 ft or so within the previous casing.  Behind all of the casing is cement on the bottom thousand feet or so.  the several surface strings were cemented to the surface.  The cement behind the pipe increases the burst strength as there is no place for it to expand to.  burst pressure is measured as if the pipe was laying on the ground and pumped up to pressure.  I expect that every joint of pipe run was burst tested to more than the spec.  However, you should note that the pipe speced would have been selected based upon a variety of factors, not just burst strength.  Tensile strength and ability to withstand temperature changes are all important considerations.  I would not consider the fact that pipe was able to withstand 22,000 psi to be any kind of telltale.  when it can withstand the other requirements, that is just what the burst strength turns out to be.

There are statements the the "well is damaged" and that is correct.  The term "well" includes ALL components.  The final long string is likely damaged at the top by the BOP shearing some of it.  It is damaged at the bottom from being dropped.  It may also have damage from the drill string dropping and hitting it.  That makes little difference as the whole thing was simply floating in the drill mud in the first place and the well was under control from the mud weight.  However the oil is flowing from the formation and up the inside of that and up the back side of that, the kill mud will follow the same route.  damage to that casing string is important IF it was to be a producing well.  It makes no difference it it is all to be surrounded by cement.

All of the different strings going down the well are smaller than the previous casing.  Any erosion is a result of velocity.  There is not enough velocity in the annulus behind the long string to create erosion of the pipe.  The erosion and the increased damage has been at the cracks in the BOP seal.  that is where the flow has the very high velocity.  Expanding the crack from 1/4" to 1/2" withing the BOP accounts for the flow increase and the drop of pressure readings within the BOP.  It is not particularly associated with a crack in any pipe near the surface.  And that also addresses the nonsense of saying that BP lied about flow rates.  I do not believe that BP has ever provided an estimate of actual flow rates.  However, erosion of the BOP components has certainly allowed the rate to increase.

[Tree of Liberty]

I agree that based on your data you are using makes a decent case that the relief well should provide a fairly high potential for success.  In regard to all the well and formation concerns that have been mentioned before around this block lease, serious doubt IMHO has been raised on the supplied data from BP.  The information which is being communicated  in non official company channels indicates there are serious problems with encountering unforeseen pressure kicks in the drilling process.  Unfortunately we can only wait to see what the outcome will be, but the company that I work for is not at all convinced that this current relief well program will succeed and they continue to offer any and all assistance which is not being accepted at any level.  This is why most of our offline discussions lead to deep feelings that they are hiding something.

again thanks for your explanation

[Augustus]

It is not my data.  It is the information supplied by BP.  Do you know of a well in the GoM that encountered 25,000 psi at 18,000 ft?  supply a link.  thanks.

Is there a well ever drilled that encountered 100,000 psi.?  Links please.  thanks.

You have supplied nothing to be an alternative to the BP data.  Tell us how there could be a methane bubble when methane is lighter than air?  Tell us how there is 14% methane in Venice, LA., 40 miles from the source.  Tell us how there can be a Tsunami from the increased methane hydrates of this well.

Every post includes some comment that BP lied.  When, exactly did BP lie about the condition of this well?  What does your office say?

I've got a deep feeling that you are full of nonsense.  I'll ask my office if they agree.

[tempo]

  Perhaps I am wrong but when asked whether there are other leaks miles from the blowout, the Govt. and BP ignore the question.  Agustus (who wants a blogger to answer the question) please reference when and where the Govt. and/or BP have answered the question of whether or not there are other leaks.   Also BP and other operators should be required to release all mud logs and technical data of all wells within a 25 mile radius of the blowout to the public and universities so a complete analysis can be made of risk of major collapse of a large portion of this potentially unstable area in the GoM.   At this point, private for profit info about potential oil reservoirs must be secondary to the safety of millions in the GoM.   Capping the blowout well is likely not the most important issue.

[Augustus]

Neither BP or the Government have directly affirmed that there are no other leaks, AFAIK.  I believe Admiral Allen stated that they did not know of any other leaks.  He did confirm that there was no evidence of a leak from the seafloor near the wellhead.  It is the bloggers who continually state with certainty that there IS a leak from a fissure.  Exactly what evidence, if any, do they have to back that up?  NONE is the correct answer.

The logs of this well show a modest 65' pay zone.  Although that is certainly commercial, it is not particularly large.  What evidence do you have to make the claim that this location is more "potentially unstable" than any other?  The idea that there is the possibility of sea floor collapse is just not possible.  Where do you find such stories?

Your comment that killing the well is not the most important issue is very surprising.  That is a very odd and unsupported claim.

[RichardP]

BP and the Gov't must prove that a major leak miles from the blowout does not exist?  Why?  No one has yet proved that it does exist.  That was the point of Augustus' question.  If you claim something exists, document that it does.

Given that there is natural seepage all over the gulf, and given that there are abandoned wells all over the gulf, there might be a leak miles from the blowout.  That is not the point.  The point is, no one has yet documented that it exists.

Capping the blowout well is likely not the most important issue.

There are maps available on the internet that show the vast number of active and played out oil wells in the gulf.  If there is something more imporant than capping the blowout, it would first be important at these other well sites.  I'm assuming you are concerned with the gulf floor collapsing.  If it hasn't collapsed yet after 60+ years of pumping oil out, why are you suddenly concerned about the BP blowout location?

[Diogenes]

We already know the casing was not cemented properly, that's one of the reasons  it blew.

We also know the oil and gas has been blowing out and eroding the hole for months.

So, if the relief wells only work if the casing is intact does that mean the relief wells won't work?

[gasmiinder]

Why do you believe the relief wells only work if the casing is intact?  I strongly believe the flow is in the annulus behind the 9 7/8x7" long string.  Still believe it will work.

Understand - they will drill into the flowing borehole with the relief well.  Instantly the pressure in the relief well (~13,000 psi) begins to flow into the other hole.  All they have to do at that point is make sure they keep pumping enough mud to maintain the circulation and fill the other borehole.  IT DOES HAVE RISK but it is NOT rocket science.  Hitting the other Macondo borehole is what may require several tries.

[geminiRX]

I  think the real question is whether, "will they tell you the relief well is working"?

Considering they don't allow cameras within 65m, how will you know?

[gasmiinder]

When the multiple ROV feeds show the oil isn't flowing out of the pipe anymore.

Sheesh

[Gully Foyle]

Let us journey now through time and space

http://www.nationalpost.com/most_popular/story.html?id=610810

Obama's fight against 'dirty oil' could hurt oil sands

Tuesday, Jun. 24, 2008

WASHINGTON -- Barack Obama on Tuesday vowed he would break America’s addiction to “dirty, dwindling, and dangerously expensive” oil if he is elected U.S. president -- and one of his first targets might well be Canada’s oil sands.

A senior adviser to Mr. Obama’s campaign told reporters it’s an “open question” whether oil produced from northern Alberta’s oilsands fits with the Democratic candidate’s plan to shift the U.S. sharply away from consumption of carbon-intensive fossil fuels.

“If it turns out that those technologies don’t advance . . . and the only way to produce those resources would be at a significant penalty to climate change, then we don’t believe that those resources are going to be part of the long-term, are going to play a growing role in the long-term future,” said Jason Grumet, Mr. Obama’s senior energy adviser.

...

Christopher Sands, a Canada-U.S. relations expert at the Washington-based Hudson Institute, said Mr. Obama’s energy policy could pose as big a challenge to the Canadian economy as his vow to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement.

“What he wants to do, clearly, is to eliminate oil sources like the oil sands. He is very aware of them and the process that’s generating them,” Mr. Sands said.

[Cursive]

Check out Greg Palast's take on BP:

http://www.youtube.com/user/RTAmerica#p/search/1/5z5DXxGZLo8

Just found his website after watching his documentary:

http://www.gregpalast.com/

[Oh regional Indian]

If one is to stand back and see the media manipulation and information obfuscation around the Deepwater Horizon, the mind boggles.

Too much information on inconsequential things, too little on things that matter.

Every aspect of the art of public opinion building has been on display. Nuts.

On another note, c# that is, the meme is slowly and surely swinging to Bomb it. Nuke? Maybe not eh? But let's bomb it.

Which will switch again to Nuke, at the right, desperate moment.

The play book is well worn.

Of course the relief wells won't work. We need a stronger lesson.

ORI

http://aadivaahan.wordpress.com

[ATG]

"Of course the relief wells won't work?"

Disinformation, evidence, locoweed, logic, rationale, anything beside "I read it on a blog"?

John Wright, the Boots & Coots project manager on this BP Macondo Deepwater Horizon fail, has a 40 of 40 success record on bottom kills. No nukes either:

http://www.bootsandcoots.com/

http://www.jwco.com/

http://www.jwco.com/newsLetters/JWCO%20Brochure.pdf

Check out Red Adair, John Wayne Hellfighters and the Devil's Cigarette Lighter that burned in Algeria for more months than this one:

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/231727/the_devils_cigarette_lighter/

Or Bravo Phillips offshore, the largest North Sea Blowout, including subsidence.

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

Or the Gulf War oilwell fires and mines set by Iraq that led to Gulf War Syndrome and Carl Sagan's false prediction of nuclear winter:

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

Some people never let facts get in the way of fantasy...

[dehdhed]

i keep hearing they are ahead of schedule .. but i can't find any info on what the scheduled date is?

anyone know?  or is 'ahead of schedule' just fluff?