Feeds:
Posts
Comments

While C-SPAN has broadcast some of the proceedings, the Deepwater Horizon Joint Investigation hearings have inexplicably not been streamed live by the Coast Guard (USCG) and Department of the Interior (DOI).  The National Commission and Chemical Safety Board streamed their hearings live, but the USCG and DOI have not done so.  Why? This is perhaps the most significant accident in the history of the US offshore oil and gas program, and the most notable worldwide offshore disaster since Piper Alpha in 1988. Eleven men died on the Deepwater Horizon.  Economic costs will total in the tens of $billions. Major regulatory changes, some of which don’t appear to address identified risks, are being imposed.

The upcoming hearings are particularly important because the BOP issues that will be discussed have enormous international significance. In this era, the world shouldn’t have to travel to New Orleans to observe the hearings, rely on sketchy press reports, or wait months for transcripts to be released. (And how is it that the Montara Inquiry Commission in Australia was able to post transcripts within hours after the conclusion of each day’s hearing?)

Accident prevention is dependent on complete and timely information.  Had more people paid attention to Montara, Macondo may have been prevented. The upcoming Deepwater Horizon BOP hearings are of critical importance, and should be streamed so that all interested parties can follow the proceedings.

A shortened and simplified summary from information provided in the DNV report:

  1. The Upper Variable Bore Rams (VBRs) were closed prior to the Emergency Disconnect Sequence (EDS) activation at 21:56 on April 20, 2010.
  2. A drill pipe tool joint was located between the Upper Annular Preventer (closed) and the Upper VBRs (also closed). Forces from the flow of the well pushed the tool joint into the Upper Annular element. Because the tool joint was trapped beneath the closed annular preventer (and could not move upward), forces from the flowing well caused the pipe to push upward and buckle.
  3. The drill pipe deflected until it contacted the wellbore just above the Blind Shear Ram (BSR).  The portion of the drill pipe located between the shearing blade surfaces of the BSR was off center and held in this position by buckling forces.
  4. A portion of the pipe cross section was outside of the intended BSR shearing surfaces and did not shear as intended.
  5. As the BSR closed, a portion of the drill pipe cross section became trapped between the ram block faces, preventing the blocks from fully closing and sealing.
  6. Since the deflection of the drill pipe occurred from the moment the well began flowing, trapping of the drill pipe would have occurred regardless of which means initiated the closure of the BSR.
  7. In the partially closed position, flow continued through the drill pipe trapped between the ram block faces and subsequently through the gaps between the ram blocks.
  8. When the drill pipe was sheared on April 29, 2010, using the Casing Shear Ram (CSR), the flow expanded through the open drill pipe at the CSR and up the entire wellbore to the BSR and through the gaps along the entire length of the block faces and around the side packers. The CSR was designed to cut tubulars, not seal the well bore.

sheared off-center drill pipe

Just released.

The DNV report will be discussed in the upcoming hearings:

The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement (BOEMRE)/U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) Joint Investigation Team, which is examining the Deepwater Horizon explosion and resulting oil spill, today announced that it will hold a seventh session of public hearings the week of April 4, 2011. The hearings, which will focus specifically on the forensic examination of the Deepwater Horizon blowout preventer (BOP), are scheduled to take place at the Holiday Inn Metairie, New Orleans Airport, 2261 North Causeway Blvd., Metairie, La.

Professor Robert Bea

Bob Bea

Dr. Bob Bea, UC Berkeley Center for Catastrophic Risk Management, and his Deepwater Horizon Study Group have issued their final report on the Macondo blowout. I look forward to reading the full documents.

Bob has been at the vanguard on risk management issues for many years. While he jokes that there are two things engineers can’t deal with – uncertainty and people, Bob is an engineer who understands both! Kudos to Bob and his group for their leadership and initiative.

Our oil spill expert, Cheryl Anderson, has been monitoring the Gulf of Mexico slick reports, and has provided the following update:

Excerpt from a NOLA.com article below published 4-5 hours after yesterday’s Coast Guard media briefing regarding the source of the latest slick in Louisiana state waters :

A state official, speaking on condition of anonymity because of a continuing Coast Guard investigation, said the Department of Wildlife and Fisheries traced the emulsified oil on the west side of the river to its apparent source at West Delta Block 117. He said tests by a state-contracted lab confirmed that was the source of the oil.

Wildlife and Fisheries officials found the source of the oil Monday evening and encountered workers in a boat trying to restore a cap on the well using a remotely operated submarine.

There was a USCG Media Briefing at 2 pm local time Monday [4-5 hours before the NOLA.com article was published]. The briefing confirmed that the 100-mile sheen on Saturday was not petroleum, just sediments from water disturbances.

With regard to the most recent slick, the Coast Guard said:

–no source had been identified,

–no active spill incidents had been identified,

–spill had been Federalized,

–testing showed that it was Louisiana crude, and

–LSU was still working on the tests to see if the oil matched the Macondo well or any recorded previous spill incident.

from SeabedRig.com

Advances in drilling technology tend to be evolutionary, not revolutionary. Floating rigs, dynamic positioning, top-drive systems, measurement-while-drilling, automated rig floors, and other important advances were logical next steps, not radical makeovers.

Many of us have long been fascinated by the possibility of locating drilling equipment on the seafloor, particularly for deepwater wells. Why operate from a massive floating vessel that requires a sophisticated stationkeeping system and a long riser to connect to the wellhead? Why link surface personnel to seafloor risks? Why increase the complexity of balancing well pressures (without fracturing formations) by adding thousands of feet to the mud column? Why heave and roll on the surface when you can operate from the seafloor?

It’s not that easy, of course, and there are many questions and issues. While fully automated drilling systems are no longer a reach, what about reliability and repairs?  How will casing be set and cemented? How will downhole measurements be transmitted to the control center? Cuttings samples? Coring? Well testing? The list of challenges is daunting.

At least one company, Seabed Rig, is committed to developing and demonstrating seafloor drilling technology. Earlier this month, Seabed Rig reached agreement with NASA to create the first autonomous drilling rig. While a lot of work remains, Seabed Rig and other pioneering companies are applauded for their innovative thinking and willingness to challenge conventional practices and wisdom.

  1. The Petrobras Cascade-Chinook project, which includes the first Floating Production Storage and Offloading (FPSO) facility in the Gulf of Mexico, received final approval.
  2. The US will be a major purchaser of Brazilian (Petrobras) deepwater oil production. Will some of the tankers pass through US offshore areas that are closed to exploration and production?

Kudos to:

  1. The US Coast Guard for promptly analyzing the Gulf of Mexico sheen that was reported over the weekend and determining that it was not associated with offshore oil and gas production.
  2. The many news organizations and journalists who ignored the irresponsible speculation, and waited for the Coast Guard to complete its investigation.

Wall Street Journal:

What was reported as a miles-long oil slick in the Gulf of Mexico is likely a plume of silt emanating from a dredging operation on the Mississippi River, a U.S. Coast Guard spokesman said Sunday.

So much for the hysterical post-Macondo rush to judgement by a few reporters.

The Examiner is reporting the following:

The oil sheen is suspected of coming from the Matterhorn field which includes a deepwater drilling rig, Matterhorn Seastar that is owned by W&T Technology.   The oil is suspected from coming from a leak in the well which is a producing well.

Suspected by whom? Does the reporter have legitimate information or is this rank speculation? The Coast Guard is sorting this out, so we should know something soon. A statement from W&T would be helpful.