# BP blowout in the Gulf



## Mike Reilley (Jan 2, 2008)

Best explanation of what has happened....

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1066057/pg1


----------



## Rod Fearnley (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Rod Fearnley on 24 May 2010 01:30 AM 


*SORRY - YOUR IP ADDRESS HAS BEEN BANNED - 











Thank you for not stalking!*




*Now why is that? I guess I shall just have to e-mail them.
*
*Rod*


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Thanks Mike, 
Nice to know, bad to realise all the what if's.... 
I remember when the river burned in Cleveland, now I fear the Gulf could be set ablaze! 
May God help us! 

John


----------



## Pete Chimney (Jan 12, 2008)

Actually half of teh technical details you read about this blow-out in the press or hear on CNN and other TV outlets is in error. This article is no exception, the mis-information is all through this piece.

My credentials: I have worked for over 32 years as an oil exploration geologist all over the world. I have been on any number of drilling rigs, currently I have a well drilling offshore west Africa.


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

So Pete are you saying this isn't as bad as we think? Or just full of mis-information and still a danger?


----------



## Pete Chimney (Jan 12, 2008)

The spill of crude oil is to be stopped ASAP. The assertion in the article that the gas will cut away at the casing and cause the well to becvome a super-flowing well is not reasonable. So is the assertion by some that the pressure is enormous in the subsurface reservoirs and jit is ust waiting to form a super-volcano of sorts.

Remember, between 500,000 and 1,000,000 barrels of crude come to the surface natrually every year in the Gulf, leaking from faults and fracture that come up to the sea floor. There are significant oil seeps across the coast of Southern California and there is still aquatic life off the coast of California. During WWII U-boats sank tens to dozens of oil tankers off the eastern coast of the US, there is no trace today of that spilled oil on the beaches of the Carolinas up through New Jersey.


----------



## Mike Reilley (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Pete Chimney on 24 May 2010 12:29 PM 
...The assertion in the article that the gas will cut away at the casing and cause the well to becvome a super-flowing well is not reasonable...


Can you explain why? The article doesn't say gas will "cut away" the casing...it says that abrasive material (rock and dirt) flowing past the bends in the pipes will erode the casing wall...which will eventually rupture when it gets thin enough...given that it's under pressure. That seems to make sense to me...what's wrong with that logic? This is something that I've NOT seen reported anywhere on the TV...they're all too busy talking about what the government is doing...or not doing.


----------



## Charles (Jan 2, 2008)

Pete
So explain the Exxon mess in Alaska? To this day there is oil seeping up from the surface that was the result of the spill. A spill that will minor in comparison to the Gulf. But put aside the oil flow amount and just look at the initial tragedy developing in and around the wildlife in the marshes where it is near impossible to help species to overcome the effects of oil. Then there is the economical impact on those who will be restricted from their livelihood through the reality of pollution both in tourism and fishing.
I do not believe that you can write this off in comparison to some leaks and sunken ships. Probably the only positive out of this bad situation is a spot light on the poor regulations and carelessness of BP and other big oil companies along with the other finger pointing contractors.


----------



## Pete Chimney (Jan 12, 2008)

Two factors are different in Lousiana vs. Alaska. 

First, the temperature of the water is much colder in Alaska which inhibits the level or effectiveness of biologic activity is lessened. Second factor, the oil in Alaska is much heavier, higher in asphaltenes compared to the light crude in the Gulf which means biologic activity offshore Alaska will be less effective in "eating" the oil.


----------



## Pete Chimney (Jan 12, 2008)

Here is a link to a more technical description of the blowout in the Gulf. From what I have heard from friends working in "the patch" this is a more or less accurate description of the abandonment procedures that BP was running when they had their blowout. I believe when the investigation is complete it will become apparent the procedure followed for this well was either now followed according to plan or was woefully inadequate for the depth/pressure regime where BP was drilling.

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6493


----------



## kormsen (Oct 27, 2009)

Posted By Pete Chimney on 24 May 2010 03:00 PM 
... I believe when the investigation is complete it will become apparent the procedure followed for this well was either now followed according to plan or was woefully inadequate for the depth/pressure regime where BP was drilling.


well, i wouldn't give a single cent about who is to blame. i would be much more interested to know, what can be done, to keep the damage as small as possible. what do you say to that part of the link presented in the first post?


----------



## Gary Armitstead (Jan 2, 2008)

According to this article, TWICE the amount of oil from the Exxon Valdez spill, leaks into the Gulf of Mexico from natural cracks on the ocean floor, EVERY year and has been for many thousands of years. A little perspective here. Just sayin'.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/release...082228.htm


----------



## msimpson (Jan 5, 2009)

On the one hand, substantial oil leakage is natural and nature seems to handle it. On the other hand, this is a whole bunch of oil (expletives deleted) and it's not pretty or healthy as it comes ashore. Humans have plundered the gulf routinely for 400 years or so, leading to periodic fishing bans (to allow stocks to recover), lots of debris on most beaches, too many condos, etc. Even assuming this thing gets shut down soon, there are tremendous amounts of oil already in the water, much of it at great depths. I grew up (50+ years ago) playing on "the World's Most beautiful beaches" (Panama City to Destin) and would like to do it again before I die. 

So pray along with me. Regards, Mike


----------



## Mike Reilley (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Pete Chimney on 24 May 2010 03:00 PM 
Here is a link to a more technical description of the blowout in the Gulf. From what I have heard from friends working in "the patch" this is a more or less accurate description of the abandonment procedures that BP was running when they had their blowout. I believe when the investigation is complete it will become apparent the procedure followed for this well was either now followed according to plan or was woefully inadequate for the depth/pressure regime where BP was drilling.

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6493

Yeah...I've been following that link for over two weeks. Very informative. Still, nothing in it about the casing erosion possibility discussed in the first link I posted above. That was a new twist. That theoildrum.com thread has one great post that seems to fit...when drilling an oil well, you can do it fast, cheap, and safe....cept you only get to pick two.


----------



## Pete Chimney (Jan 12, 2008)

Mike

Many wells around the world produce (or have produced) at 5,000, 10,000 or more BOPD (barrels of oil per day) with no casing corrosion or erosion due to sand production, especially in vetical casing strings. There may be eorsion in the bent riser but that is not a worry, once the well is controlled the riser is nothing more than scrap steel and will be removed from the BOP stack.


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Well I read all the comments that followed your link Pete and mention was made of the sand in the oil eroding obstructions (bent drill string) and increasing it's flow. 
Unlike safe wells this one's string was bent inside the riser when the unsinkable rig sank.... not as easy peasy as you infer. 
But thanks for a good read. 
John


----------



## Pete Chimney (Jan 12, 2008)

The current top kill operation by BP entails pumping heavy weight mud through ports in the BOP stack and down the annulus outside the tapered 9-5/8 x 7" casing string. Once the mud is down and comes up inside the casing string the flow of oil will stop because the pressure of the full column of mud at the bottom of the well will be higher than the formation pressure.

Sand erosion of the vertical casing string is not an issue. Is is possible if there is a high rate of sand production that there might be some erosion within the fallen riser but once the mud is in place the riser is no longer required and can be removed and cementing operations begun.


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Did you read today where BP has finally admitted that this is now an Environmental Catastrophy.... 

All that malarky about the the best engineering reports (which means best for BP and liability) has been dropped and a little honesty is being shown. 

Did you hear that BP fired any worker who dared to wear a respirator while doing clean-up? Screw the public and put on a happy face! Yeah back to protecting corporate a**es and screw the people. While some workers were hospitalised because of those fumes... 

Pete, earlier you boldly state that the well would be killed ASAP and all would be well.... I think you need to reasses your optimism. Even BP said it might work (60 -70% likely), but no gaurantee. 

Gary; seeps are not gushers and are not grouped together, nor near major shipping lanes...your perspective is flawed... the blowout is a totally different animal and can't be sugar coated. 

John


----------



## Allan W. Miller (Jan 2, 2008)

I can't do anything to profoundly impact that oil spill in the Gulf, but I can do a bit as a consumer to show my outrage at what has been allowed to happen there. 

When I moved back to Ohio some three years ago, I obtained a BP card because they have a station convenient to where I live and work. 

About a week or so ago, I decided to apply for a Marathon card because they also have a station that is equally convenient to my location. That card arrived today. The BP card will be destroyed now, just as my Exxon card was destroyed a number of years ago after that company screwed up the Alaska coastline. 

A small action, to be sure, but it does make me feel like I've at least done something.


----------



## Pete Chimney (Jan 12, 2008)

I believe I stated the well needed to be brought under control ASAP. This is different than stating it would be kiiled quickly.


----------



## Mike Reilley (Jan 2, 2008)

Pete...thanks for the explanations. It always amazes me at the expertise available on this site. Maybe you answer some more questions.

I think I understand the mud operation...pump the mud into the BOP under pressure so that you equalize the pressure of the oil/gas flow...then increase it a bit more...and the mud is forced down inside the inner casing (the 7" one) and also down the gap between the inner casing and the outer casing (the 9+" one at the bottom of the well). Once enough mud is down there...it's weight keeps the oil/gas from flowing up.

Once you have the oil/gas flow stopped, the next step is to pump concrete down and displace the mud. When the concrete is dry, you have plugged the well. Next, the relief wells finally get to the point where the bottom of the well is...and you pump more concrete under the old well. Then you do what you do to abandon the wells...pull the gear off the ocean floor etc.


What I don't understand...and perhaps you can explain...is:

a. Why do they keep pumping mud down to the BOP (we see it coming out the top of the BOP now)? If there's enough in the casing to keep the oil/gas down, why do they keep the pressure up and keep pumping mud out of the top of the BOP?


b. Given that the BOP has large holes in it now where metal has cracked and failed...or eroded...and given that the whole casing string is now full of mud, how do they get concrete pumped under pressure to go DOWN the casing and displace the mud...without it all just coming out the top of the BOP? Is that what you think they mean by a junk shot...putting stuff into the BOP that flows UP to the top to clog it so the concrete can be forced down the well?


c. Given that all the spaces between the drill pipe inside the inner casing and between the inner and outer casing are full of mud...and given that they can't pump the concrete down the drill pipe to the bottom of the well...how do they pump concrete down into the casing at all? Are they trying to just push the mud down the casing with the concrete and out the bottom of the casing? I thought that the concreting jobs were normally done by pumping the concrete down the drill pipe to the bottom of the well....or down the inner casing to the bottom of the well where it flowed under the bottom of the inner casing and into the space between the inner and outer casing. Since they can't get to anyone of the three individual pipes (drill pipe, inner casing, or outer casing)...how the heck can they concrete the well in?


Any help explaining this would be appreciated.


----------



## Mike Reilley (Jan 2, 2008)

There's some good info here http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6522

It doesn't read as things are going very well.


----------



## Pete Chimney (Jan 12, 2008)

Mike

A few comments here.

First I believe the BOP stack is undamaged, the riser pipe above the LMRP (Lower Riser Marine Package) has collapse and split but the BOP is not damaged.

Second, as this well was drilled a series of strings of casing were run in the hole and cemented in at certain depths to contain sloughing shales or elevated formation pressure. Thik of these as telescoping strings of pipe each smaller than the previously run pipe

Third, in oil and gas wells we use cement, not concrete, concrete has aggregate, cement does not.

The well was drilled with minimal problems to total depth with mud of sufficient weight to contain the formation pressure. Usually wells are drilled over-balanced, that is the weight of the mud and pressure at the bottom of the well will be several hundreds to maybe 1000 psi higher than the formation pressures. If the well is drilled under-balanced the formations can flow. Conversely, if the mud weight is too high the pressure might be high enough at the bottom of the well to cause the rock to fracture and mud will be lost into the formation.

The only string of casing that runs from the bottom of the well is the single 9-5/8" x 7" tapered string. This was the string that was cemented in just before the blowout. As this casing was hanging in the well cement was pumped down drill pipe inside this casing string and the allowed to flow up outside the casing. The purpose is to firmly attach this to the sides of the open hole as well as prevent fluids/gases from flowing up outside of this casing string. From what i have read as released by BP and Halliburton there was a 50 barrel cement job run on this casing string. The volume of cement pumped for this job did not allow it to rise above the top of the base of the previously run casing string. I believe this was a critical error on the part of BP, i.e. not tieing these two casing strings together with cement.

Also reported was the fact that the deep formations were thought to be thiefing off cement and nitrogen gas was piped into the cement as it was being pumped to lessen the weight and lessen the tendency of the cement to flow into the formation. This would also tend to reduce the effectiveness of the cement and lessen it's ability to hold back pressure. Coupled with the short cement job this might also have been a critical error.

So when the heavy weight mud in the riser was displaced with sea water this lessened the pressure on the last casing string. Two things might have happened. First the small cement job at the base of the well might have allowed oil and gas to leak up into the annulus outside of the 9-5/8" x 7" string. Secondly the high pressure might have lifted the entire casing string vertically, and broken the cement seal at the bottom of this tapered casing string allowing for oil and gas to flow up inside the string. If the casing was forced upwards the casing hanger at the very top of the hole, immediately below the BOP stack, might have been pushed up into the BOP. The blind or shear rams are not designed, not expected, to be able to cut through casing hanger assemblies, this is far too much steel.

So what BP is trying to do is bullhead mud down the annulus and hoping to overcome the flow of oil and gas. As oil and gas are rising up this channel they may have to pump against this flow and for a time the flow will bring mud to the surface and allow a discharge of drilling mud out through the riser. But if they can force enough mud into the annulus they may eventually overcome the flow and create a static condition. At this point they can then pump cement into the annulus and when cured (cement cures, it does not dry) will form a seal. Likewise BP will want to spot cement inside the tapered casing string. Whether they continue with the relief wells remains to be seen. They might do this as added insurance to fully plug the well.

One thing I do know, this wellbore will be junked and abandoned, it will never be placed into production.

I should put in a caveat here. I do not nor have I ever worked for BP. These are my opinions and are based on my knowledge of working in the oil and gas business for over 32 years coupled with I have glenaed from BP and others PRs with factual info.


----------



## SteveC (Jan 2, 2008)

Mike

If I'm not mistaken, first it's the heavy mud, then ground up tires, golf balls and other debris of various sizes which is likely to jam against one another and create a plug, then the hydraulic cement as the last element.

Hehehe, after reading Pete's explnation this was a waste.


----------



## jfrank (Jan 2, 2008)

Thanks Pete for the interesting explanations and the link.


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Posted By Pete Chimney on 28 May 2010 01:50 PM 
I believe I stated the well needed to be brought under control ASAP. This is different than stating it would be kiiled quickly.

"The spill of crude oil is to be stopped ASAP."

That's what you said, spin please. Sounded kinda finite to me. 
I don't want to put you on the spot. The above came off as; Don't worry...

Unfortunately we don't have Cap't Piccard and his #1 To make it so.....

John


----------



## Mike Reilley (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Pete Chimney on 28 May 2010 05:08 PM 


...So what BP is trying to do is bullhead mud down the annulus and hoping to overcome the flow of oil and gas. As oil and gas are rising up this channel they may have to pump against this flow and for a time the flow will bring mud to the surface and allow a discharge of drilling mud out through the riser. But if they can force enough mud into the annulus they may eventually overcome the flow and create a static condition. At this point they can then pump cement into the annulus and when cured (cement cures, it does not dry) will form a seal. Likewise BP will want to spot cement inside the tapered casing string...

Pete...thanks for the explanation...but you're hitting on the issues I think that are NOT being reported anywhere...and has confused me. 

There is an annulus between the tapered pipe...and the casing...and there is a big hole down the center of the tapered casing string. 

You say "trying to bullhead mud down the annulus"...and "spot cement inside the tapered casing string". I don't see how they can AIM the mud from the BOP...or the cement. I don't see how they make whatever they doing deliberate for the annulus exclusive of the tapered casing. All they can do is pump it into the BOP...and hope it goes down (and not up)...into the annulus and the tapered casing string. I can't see there is any way to separate where the mud goes...it just goes down the well under pressure...which is why I asked how they manage to displace the mud with cement to seal the well....or is what you're saying is that they don't replace the mud with cement to close the well....they just put some cement on top of the mud.


----------



## John J (Dec 29, 2007)

In the Gulf the oil is spilling out under it's own presure. So if the oil is under presure why do you need the pumps I see along I 35 on the way to Marty's


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

JJ; Perhaps because they aren't under a mile of water.... and I believe the first wells (above ground) in a resivoir bleed off the pressures, so following wells need pumps.... 

Mike; The BOP has valves and means to direct the flow. Cemeting between the casing and earth was already part of the plan, so the means to do that are built in. 

John


----------

