This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Will BP Skip the Relief Well, Declare Mission Accomplished, and Abandon Ship Without Permanently Killing the Oil Leak?
Yesterday, I pointed out that - while everyone is claiming that the oil well has been capped - it hasn't really been capped.
AP reported last night:
BP, U.S. mull whether to skip 'bottom kill'
***
The
federal government and BP have recently raised the possibility that
they won't need to perform the operation at all, since the well was
plugged last month with mud and cement pumped in through the top.
(Bottom kill is, of course, just another phrase for relief wells.)
Similarly, Bloomberg writes today:
BP Plc may not finish drilling a relief well to its
Macondo well in the Gulf of Mexico, National Incident Commander Thad
Allen said during a conference call today.The relief well, which for months has been touted by the
U.S. government as the ultimate solution to stopping the flow
from Macondo -- a process known as “killing” the well -- may
not be needed after all, Allen said.
Oil industry expert Robert Cavnar has a must-read piece today on the situation:
For
the last several days, I've been trying to figure out what BP is doing
and what is the actual condition of BP's MC252 well after their
"static kill" and cementing procedure last week apparently didn't work.
You'll recall that when [BP's] Kent Wells announced this procedure, he
actually used the words "killed" and "dead".
***
To add to the argument to go ahead with the kill, Adm. Allen said in his July 22nd briefing:
"We have a pressure head up there that would help us now fill the top part of the well with mud. That would actually ultimately enhance the relief well effort that would take place five to seven days later." (emphasis added)
On
August 2nd and 3rd, BP ran the "static kill" pumping 2,300 barrels of
mud. Early in the morning on the 4th, BP issued a press release saying
the the well had reached a "static condition" with well pressure
"controlled by the hydrostatic pressure of the drilling mud." In his
McBriefing later that day, Wells actually said that when they pumped the
mud, they could actually see it go into the reservoir by pressures,
and that they pumped up to 15 barrels per minute. They studiously
avoided the terms "dead" and "killed". During the briefing, Wells also said:"And
what we - what we're doing now is, every six hours, we just inject a
little more mud into the well, just to continue to give ourselves
confidence that we can do that, keep our equipment live, and we're
seeing a very, very static set of conditions as we continue to monitor the pressure, which is all very encouraging." (empasis added)With
all the encouraging signs, [U.S. Secretary of Energy] Steve Chu
approved pumping cement, which they did on the 5th. In a briefing on
the 6th, Doug Suttles declared victory, say that the "...cement job is
performing as expected". He also said that they pumped 500 barrels of
cement, leaving about 200 inside the casing.All was right with
the world. Except, it wasn't. Day before yesterday, Adm. Allen
announced they were going to start a "pressure test", babbling about
the annulus and raising the ominous spectre that they are still
actually communicated to the reservoir. Wells confirmed that fear in
the afternoon, admitting that they indeed had 4,200 psi on the well
when it's supposed to be dead. At the seafloor, the well should have
no more than 2,200 psi on it, and conceivable less, if the hydrostatic
of the mud in the closed well had overcome reservoir pressure. Then it
got really confusing. Wells said that it wouldn't hold 4,200 psi
because of "bubbles" leaking out of the wellhead, implying that they
are pumping on it to keep it there, but that they're going to "test" it
by relieving pressure. ?? Also, the more Adm. Allen explains what's
going on, the more the press gets confused. Hell, I understand this
business and I'm confused.To add to the jumble, Adm Allen said this in his briefing yesterday:
"Sure,
there's a very low probability that we might have actually sealed the
annulus with the cement that came down the pipe casing and came back up
around it. What we want to do is understand whether or not there's
what we call free communication. In other words whether there, the
hydrocarbons in the reservoir can actually come up through the annulus
outside the casing, if that's the case when we go in and we drill in we
put the mud and cement we're just going to drive that down and seal the
well. OK? If there's cement there and there's no communication
that means we have what we call stagnate oil trapped around that casing
up to the well head. If you go in and you start pumping mud and
cement in there the chances are you could raise the pressure and push
that up into the blow out preventer. And that's a very low
possibility, low probability event but we want to, we want to test the
pressure in the blow out preventer and see if we actually have pressure
coming up that would indicate that we have free communication with the
reservoir. If not that would change our tactics and how we do the
final kill."Clear as drilling mud. What's going
on here is that the "static kill" looks like it did the opposite of
what BP and Allen had suggested at the beginning. It certainly hasn't
accelerated the relief well. To the contrary, it has caused
interminable delays. As a matter of fact, since July 13, the DDIII has
only drilled 70 or 80 feet and set one string of casing. With all of
the shut downs for the "well integrity test", then the "well
injectivity test", then the "static kill" plus cementing, they haven't
been able to get much work done for a month, especially with the 2
weather delays.The mis-information and confusion is also taking
its toll. I got asked in an interview yesterday that since the well
is "dead" now, why are they bothering with the relief well? AP reported
last night that BP and the government are contemplating skipping the
bottom kill. Every time Wells, Suttles, or Allen get in front of a
microphone, everyone gets even more confused, mis-informed, or both;
everyone just wants this to go away, but it's not going away; not until
the relief well kills from the bottom as we've been saying for over 3
months.In actuality, this "static kill" did nothing that BP and
Allen said it would do. Certainly the well is not dead or "static".
It hasn't accelerated the relief well, but it has obscured the well's
pressures, making it more difficult to kill. Hence, these new tests to
figure out what's going on. BP and the government don't really have a
clue where the 2,300 barrels of mud and 500 barrels of cement went.
They originally claimed it all went down the casing and out to the
reservoir. I would set the probability of that actually having happened
at zero. Here's why: The positive test on the casing the night of the
blowout was rock solid. The casing was good. It is possible that
they may have collapsed the production casing during the blowout, but
that would have been relatively high up in the wellbore, probably where
they had displaced with seawater on the inside. If that happened, it
would be communicated with the backside. In addition, at the bottom of
the production casing is a float shoe, 134 feet of cement in the shoe
track, then a float collar, then 2 cementing plugs with probably
cement on top of those. Oh, and don't forget about the 3,000 feet of
drill pipe hanging inside all of that. There is no way, unless that
entire float assembly blew off, that they pumped down the casing and up
the backside. On top of all that, there are HUGE lost circulation
zones both below and above the reservoir. During drilling they lost
3,000 barrels of mud trying to drill that last section.So,
where did all the mud and cement go? It likely went down the backside
of the production casing and either out through some damage that was
caused during the aborted top kill, or out the lost circulation zone
right below the 9 7/8" liner at 17,100. The fact that they're getting
pressure now tells me that they are indeed communicated to the
reservoir below, probably obscured by the fact that they now have mud
strung through the annulus. If they are indeed communicated, pressure
will build on the wellhead, which is exactly what's happening. Adm.
Allen pledged to get BP to release the pressure data 3 days ago. The
next day, when asked about it, he said it was released, but "nobody can
find it." The data is still AWOL.So, now, here we sit,
waiting on weather again, and then we're going to pressure test a well
that's supposed to be dead instead of getting the relief well finished.
The press is confused; the public is bored.
BP has tried to cover up every aspect of the spill. See this, this and this.
The
bottom kill - the procedure which all oil industry experts agree has
the best chance of killing the leak - hasn't yet been performed. The
underwater cameras still show methane and oil leaking into the Gulf.
And yet the country's attention is already drifting away from the Gulf and to celebrities, stocks, and other issues.
I'm
beginning to wonder whether BP keeps on doing one confusing procedure
after another, and keeps on saying that the well has been capped, hoping
that everyone stops paying attention so that BP can just pack up its
bags and slink away while people aren't paying attention.
Relief
wells are the best hope for permanently capping the well. But it is
possible that BP has messed up the well so badly that the relief wells will fail.
As Cavnar notes,
BP has already taken down or blurred most of its underwater camera
feeds. BP might just declare "mission accomplished" and skip the
relief wells, leaving a ticking time bomb which will pollute the Gulf for years to come.
Note:
I hope that BP and the government do complete the relief wells next
week after the tropical storm passes. I am not predicting that BP will
skip the bottom kill ... I am only warning that they are considering it,
and am writing this so people can put pressure on BP and the government
to complete both relief wells.
- advertisements -
The leak will never be stopped. This static kill, relief well crap is just a diversion from the real source of the problem 7 miles to the south. Matt Simmons was right all along, there is a gaping hole leaking 120,000 barrels of oil every day!
GW keep at it - the enviro coverup has been there from the get go and will continue, the topkill/static kill came out of no where when all along it was the relief wells that were to be the ultimate solution.
The story is unfortunatley over. The enviro damage will persist and if leaks continue / occur down the road, unless the oil makes it to the surface you won't hear about it. BP has brilliantly linked their GOM revenue stream to the $20b of graft.
The media has gone and won't be back except for this coming weekend when the first family slums for the weekend before heading to the Vineyard. Like their bankster brethren it looks like BP and those with a political agenda have won the day.
You know, I just listened to an interview with Matt Simmons on King World News:
http://kingworldnews.com/kingworldnews/Broadcast/Entries/2010/7/17_Matt_Simmons.html
There is no way this guy is crazy or has dementia - no way. Has anybody checked up on the NOAA research?
MGA_1, Matt Simmons has died. He was a good economist.
Just added this to the essay...
Similarly, Bloomberg writes today:
The well is drilled through about 120 feet of (layers of) producing zones, porous shales and sands, and actually extends out the bottom of the producing zone, and this portion of the well is not cased. So pumping cement into this zone does not produce any certainty of sealing the bottom of the well, as you can't predict where the cement will go. Hence top kill will not work. The bottom kill well will incercept the Macondo above this producing zone, where they hope to pump cement into the annulus, outside the casing. Then they will pump cement from the top to fill the inside of the casing. The well is thus capped at present, but not killed. There is no plan to abandon the bottom kill well, or the other steps needed to finally kill the well.
Bubba, it is unkind and naive to say that the oil is gone. It will be drifting around the deep Gulf for quite a while, probably years, a movable kill zone. It is true that the Mississippi runoff creates its own kill zone, and the Gulf continues to have fish in it, which speaks more to the huge size and biological robustness of the ecosystem, and is not an argument in favor of creating more dead zones.
why isn't the media connecting dead fish in ma and nj_withering foliage in fl and mn and elsewhere to bp? msm full court press_ total denial? or total intentional silence?
Yes
http://www.paranoiamagazine.com/
Just seemed like the right place for this link.
" I am not predicting that BP will skip the bottom kill ... I am only warning that they are considering it, and am writing this so people can put pressure on BP and the government to complete both relief wells."
So that BP can COMPLETE BOTH RELIEF WELLS?
Where do you get that nonsense idea?
If the first one does the job of putting the cement in the bottom of the hole, why do you want a sceond one to disturb the plugging job that is completed? You've been studying this stuff now for months and have all of that knowledge on the Sigsby Salt and that other stuff you expounded upon. Please write about how a second relief well is necessary to plug a plugged well from RW#1. You've tried hard to maintain the expert status. Fill in the blanks on the need for the completion of RW#2.
This is all that I was referring to ...
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:
Similarly, former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich previously noted:
You are getting confused with nonsense, or it may be your sham way of drumming up eyeballs.
It took more than one well in Australia because they could not correctly intercept with the first ones. they did not intercept with five relief wells.
Robert reich knows less about drilling than he does about economics. enough on that "expert".
Bloomberg article "Gulf of Mexico dead zone" oxygen depletion area size of MA. Of course dead zone is unrelated to corexit or BP.... just run off from Mississippi River. Why is fishing banned in most of GoM if oil evaporated? If the dead zone is due to fertilizer used in growing corn for ethonol then stop mandating ethonol. BTW, Buffett makes a lot of money transporting ethonol to West Coast on his RR. Corn prices up today big time which is going to cause more dead zone in the GoM. Simmons dead; large dead zone in GOM..sad times.
Heroic - how do we establish that 1+1 =2? Same thing.
How would We the People go about establishing independent confirmation of the status? how does anyone arrange independent confirmation? Where are the universities? Where are the satellites overhead and the freekin' Navy submarines? or hired independent research diving vessels? Cousteau? Navy? British submarines?
The camera is the primary source of fact information With BP/Obama taking the camera information to the public down, then any "reality" they want to spin is difficult to refute. The bribe price having been reached, the problem is ended.
No it is a conspiracy theory because any reasonable person would be overwhelmingly convinced of the evidence. You really lose all credibility when you write this kind of nonsense. You WANTED a catastrophe and when you didn't get it instead of simply admitting you were wrong, you actually have the gall to continue. It just makes you look silly. Matt Simmons before his untimely passing committed securities fraud in my opinion by shorting the stock and than making ridiculous statements in an attempt to mobve the stock price. I don't think that is what you are doing but you look just as silly. The oil is gone. Move on.
Here's an interview with Matt Simmons:
http://kingworldnews.com/kingworldnews/Broadcast/Entries/2010/7/17_Matt_Simmons.html
This gentleman gives tremendous detail and background - in fact it's so detailed I think it would have been advisable for BP to at least discredit him with a discussion with NOAA or others doing the research. Mr. Simmons is definitely not lying in the interview, but there's certainly a chance he got his facts wrong or misread the data. Well, hopefully the oil's gone and the lesson about deep water drilling has been learned.
Say it with me everybody: "suicided"
I like to think that I follow current events closely but I only just learned of Simmons hot tub death tonight. Not particularly surprising that this didn't receive a lot of press...lots of other pop culture nonsense to focus on. Plus the whole BP spill is soooo July 2010.
hahaha. Yes. You have stumbled on the truth, my friend! We need to examine Simmons body. I believe we will find that he was injected with potassium chloride between the webbing of his toes.
...Or he just had a heart attack.
Yesterday you wrote that "everyone is saying that the well is capped". That was false yesterday and is false today. Chy would you repeat it again?
Cavner is the Matt Simmons wanna be. That is the answer to your question. He has been full of BS from the beginning. BP has never indicated that they will not run the bottom kill operation. In fact, it has been described by BP as the solution to the problem since day three.
They will run the bottom kill, test the cement bonds again, then take off the surface stackes from the wellhead and run drill pipe into the hole and plug it as it should be done. Working on a screwed up well takes a lot of extra time, patience, and money. IF only Secretary Chu and his advisors were not so interested in running 5th grade science experiments it would be much farther along.
Simply amazing that you guys still don't get it. This was NEVER a big deal. All the conspiracy theory in the world won't change that fact. 11 people lost their lives - that is the tragedy and BP should be held responsible but as far as the environment... virtually nothing. Admit you were wrong and move on. The oil is gone and so is all the money you shoved down the short side of these names.
"Admit you were wrong and move on. The oil is gone..."
The oil is gone... like all "magic" tricks it is an illusion.
oil+water+dispersant=water ??
I seriously want to see someone take a glass of water contaminated with oil, add some dispersant to it and drink it. I looked for a video of this but had no luck for some reason.
http://www.lazydork.com/movies/envy.jpg
1) I have no short position on any relevant company.
2) Ridicule of Conspiracy Theories Focuses On Diffusing Criticism of the Powerful
Accusing a dissenter of "conspiracy theory" is the new classic Amerikan ad hominem attack... a fallacy of argument.
Attack and dismiss the dissenter without logically refuting any of his evidence.
Well GW as critical as I have been of much of your approach on this topic it's only fair to point out when you've got it right..........
While Cavner's politics nauseate me, and I think early on he was willing to be as radical as necessary to get the loony left to feature his commentary (thus pumping his book prospects) - the fact is that he is the one expert you've quoted in all this process that does have Gulf Coast drilling expertise. The points he makes above are dead-on technically. In multiple comments on your threads I've stated the belief that the flow was likely up the annulus around the production string and communicated to the surface in that fashion. This is basically what Cavner's saying. If it's correct the likelihood that cement was fully circulated is extremely low. In addition if the cement is truly sealing the well there should not be 4200 psi on the cap, if that is accurate it is a priori evidence that the static kill has not been fully successful.
My question to you is do you know what the AP statement that BP & the gov't have "raised the possibility" of not completing the bottom kill is based on? Is that something that Thad the mad came up with? (Seriously I've never understood anything the guy said and I'm an industry veteran). For the life of me I can't imagine ANY reason you would not finish the bottom kill effort. The costs forward are miniscule compared with what you've spent to date and the risk/cost evaluation is completely one-sided. Knowing where that "possibility" came from would help evaluate this scenario.
And I have to ask "Does anyone know who the F#*K is in charge in Thad's shop? Is it our fine progressivist government making the decisions? If so the WHY would this even be a conceivable scenario?"
.
It was my understanding that the 4,200psi at the BOP is pressure BP has exerted on the well intentionally as part of the testing/monitoring they have been conducting:
Technical briefing (transcript) - 10 August, 1500 CDT (pdf, 31KB)
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6845
Thanks - this makes a lot more sense.
" Is it our fine progressivist government making the decisions"
Obummer et al: The Puppet's of Fascism
I'm not an oil industry veteran, but I do know a fallacious statement when I read one.
Obummer et al are bought and sold corporate shills and the puppet's of finance capital aka the corrupt oligarchy that is Wall Street.
Obummer is not a socialist or a progressive. He is a corrupt corporatist... According to il Duce, corporate ownership of the state is...
<drum roll please>... fascism.
If the Security is Corporate, then the Operation is Corporate Run
Obummer and crew take their marching orders from BP on this operation. This is evident by BP private soldiers controlling the area in military fatigues and weaponry as well as essentially impersonating law enforcement.
These are not my conjectures. These are facts from AP, NPR and other print reporters on the ground.
This operation is controlled by BP. The PR front is via BP's puppets... Obummer et al.
The first tenant of fascism is corporate owned governance... we are there.
They are now within 30 feet of the well - should know within next 2 weeks (after the latest storm system has died out) whether they indeed try to get the relief well completed and if not are they just pulling wool ?
gasmiinder,
Initially, I've never taken your criticisms personally. Why? I don't think you're a "shill". I think you're an oil industry veteran who dislikes liberals. Which is fine with me (I dislike mainstream liberals too).
I don't where AP got those quotes. AP is one of the largest news sources in the world, and interviews many top people every day.
As far as why BP or the government could even consider abandoning the relief wells, I have no idea, other than possible theories.
Ah - looking downthread at #518481 the excerpted technical briefing clarifies things. They are intentionally keeping the 4200# on the wellhead to test pressure response - basically taking the pressure off the top of the cement column incrementally to see how the pressures respond. This makes a lot more sense - I still can't fathom that they would REALLY abandon the bottom plug. I suspect that is more in some AP reporters interpretation than real planning.
So did Cavner read the technical briefing?
No. Cavner did not bother with any technical briefing.
Neither did Geo Wash. Paid shills are not required to have any real knowledge. They get paid for eyeballs and generating outrage among the ignorant.
I like it that geo Wash now includes "Leak? What Leak?" in the post title. The purpose of that misrepresentation is what? Is it to remind us that the leak from the wellhead seven miles away has now stopped flowing and without anyone actually knowing exactly where it was? Geo Wash was not at all helpful to the situation in that case as she did not provide the information on the location of that leak so that it could have been plugged with another drill ship and well. Were Geo Wash and Simmons hoping for greater damage to the GoM and to BP to help their short positions? What other reason could there be for keeping that a secret?
There is clearly some uncertainty as to the condition of the well, the casing, and the borehole. BP has always stated that the only method of permanently killing the well was the relief well and the cement across the producing formation at the bottom. Having the top of the well under control and not leaking makes that an easier and more certain operation. They don't have to deal with the loss of fluids or mud from the top of the well and overcomming the flow from the well washing the injected mud through the well and out the top.
Maintaining the pressure on the well and the cement as it cures is standard procedure. Some may recall that one of the proposed causes of the original blowout was that the engineers on the rig did not maintain the pressure for long enough. Going to a procedure of double the standard should not be considered unusual in this case. But Bob Cavner seems to not be able to understand that, or finds it inconvient to communicate it as it would not be quite as good a story. Then the Geo Wash types of echo sounders can blare the "news" as if there is something to it. Any more evidence needed to show that there is money getting circculated for this activety?
If they don't complete the bottom kill, I believe they can use the relief well to harvest the gas and oil still in the ground. One possible reason for not completing the bottom kill.
RichardP - I've always assumed it was likely that the second relief well could be easily diverted to a producer; it is not nearly as close to the existing wellbore the last time I checked. I'm going to be stunned if they don't do a bottom kill with the closest one - I don't see any other reasonable risk/reward scenario and I suspect the AP story is weak.
I agree. BP says they are going to do a bottom kill. Someone asked what possible reason could there be for not doing a bottom kill. I was just posting one possible answer - if they didn't do a bottom kill. But they say they are going to, so it's a non-issue.
But I'm saying I CAN"T think of any theories that make sense where it would benefit BP to abandon the relief wells. Particularly if it's true there is pressure on the wellhead above hydrostatic at this point.
And I must clarify - I deeply dislike ANYONE in power who wants to use that power to steal my liberties (what few still exist)......and that describes much of the the conservative political structure just as much as the liberal. I don't trust any of the bastards to do anything except take care of themselves.
"I deeply dislike ANYONE in power who wants to use that power to steal my liberties (what few still exist)......and that describes much of the the conservative political structure just as much as the liberal. I don't trust any of the bastards to do anything except take care of themselves."
I agree with every single word of what you say.
Finally, a thoughtful peek into the Abyss that is our countrymen's knowledge of science & engineering, not rumors, but apparently mixed messages from public spokesmen.
Nice BP and Government men seem to be conspiring to cap the transparency and flow of information, or could it be Maxwell Smart shadow boxing with the agents of Chaos who are posing as journalists and reporters? We should all know more in five to seven days when its done. Plugged means plugged for accountants, this is a 12000% loss and growing.
i agree 100% and its not over yet.
http://worldvisionportal.org/wvpforum/viewtopic.php?f=52&t=940#p2272
i agree 100% and its not over yet.
http://worldvisionportal.org/wvpforum/viewtopic.php?f=52&t=940#p2272
"BP PLC says it may in the future drill in the same Gulf of Mexico oil reservoir that blew its top and caused one of the world's worst spills.
Officials said Friday at a news briefing in New Orleans that the company hasn't closed the door to tapping the reservoir again.
Chief Operating Officer Doug Suttles says "there's lots of oil and gas here." He says "we're going to have to think about what to do with that at some point."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/06/bp-may-drill-new-well-in_n_6734...
why would they need to drill into the reservoir again?
I heard all the oil is just floating in a big lake down there somewhere...hell of a lot easier to pump it up if that's the case
/sarcasm off (amazing i have to do that, but one never knows around here)
sounds like a good idea to me. What could be better than getting all that oil out of the gulf?
I suppose if you have a car accident you never drive again, is that right?
Strawman FAIL
In a sensible engineering world, with the existing well sucessfully capped, the relief wells would be diverted straight into the reservoir to extract the oil asap, so reducing the pressure permanently. No pressure no future leak ever possible.
But since the good ol USofA went all Latin American and found themselves an evil capitalist whipping boy (with English accents to boot, what more proof of evil do you need?) common sense has left the building.
You're right about the first part. Why wouldn't BP use one of the relief wells to tap the oil? That pays for cleanup. That's the whole idea, there's 40mil brls+ of light oil + gas down there!
They just don't want to hear the public outcry right now. They sure as hell aren't floating away from this.
That's right up there with "my dog ate my homework" in originality. Of course, it's no big deal, just old Thad thrashing around trying to keep the stories straight. I swear to God I saw him the other day looking at some "cheat sheet" notes written in the palm of his hand during a news conference.
And BP changes their latest greatest method to save the day two or three times a week and ain't much help lately. I thought the relief well was our saviour? Then it was the top cap and static kill, then pump and dump? Now what bozos?
But don't worry, BP's got an army of dedicated and hardworking engineers working on the problem as we speak. I can't wait to read the expose book in about 12 months. BTW how old is Thad? Isn't he nearly as senile as everyone claims Simmons was? Que the hot tube.