July 19, 2010 by offshoreenergy
Statement by Admiral Allen this morning (19 July):
I authorized BP to continue the integrity test for another 24 hours and I restated our firm position that this test will only continue if they continue to meet their obligations to rigorously monitor for any signs that this test could worsen the overall situation.
Comments:
- Interesting wording. Why imply that shutting-in the well is some type of special favor to BP? One would think that BP would be directed (not allowed) to keep the well shut-in.
- I have seen no reason for discontinuing the “test.” The reported gas observation could be a natural seep of which there are hundreds in the deepwater Gulf. Even if there is minor gas seepage associated with near surface well integrity issues, this seepage will end when the source (the Macondo reservoir) is killed. It is extremely unlikely that shutting in the Macondo well would create new channels (not associated with the well bore) all the way from the reservoir back to the seafloor.
- I thought last night’s leak about a leak was interesting. Was the press leak intentional? Who was the leaker intending to embarass? BP? The Unified Command? Admiral Allen? Strange.
Posted in accidents, well control incidents | Tagged accidents, blowouts, Deepwater Horizon, Gulf of Mexico, macondo, Macondodrama, oil spill, relief well, safety, seeps, well control, well integrity test | Leave a Comment »
July 18, 2010 by offshoreenergy
Doug Suttles tweets at 0830 on 18 July:
Data continues to show encouraging signs and we’re reviewing w/ gov’t team. We will continue to leave the well shut in.
Pressure is currently 6778 PSI, what we would have forecast in a scenario where the resevoir would have been depleted.
We are continuing to run extensive tests and monitor. We’re going to take this day by day.
There doesn’t seem to be any information that would justify a resumption of flow via the collection and production systems. Yesterday’s official statement from Admiral Allen (below) is therefore a bit puzzling.
When this test is eventually stopped, we will immediately return to containment, using the new, tighter sealing cap with both the Helix Producer and the Q4000. Additional collection capacity of up to 80,000 barrels per day is also being added in the coming days.
Why resume flow?
Posted in accidents, well control incidents | Tagged accidents, blowouts, Deepwater Horizon, drilling, Gulf of Mexico, macondo, offshore oil, oil spill, safety, well control | 2 Comments »
July 17, 2010 by offshoreenergy
At this point, there is no evidence that we don’t have well integrity. -Kent Wells tweet; 17 July; 0900 ET
- If the data continue to indicate that the well is holding pressure, why add new safety and pollution risks by resuming flow through multiple collection and production systems?
- Presumably they will leave the well shut-in and finish the job with the relief well. Per Kent Wells, the relief well will intercept the well bore by the end of the month. This would seem to be a conservative estimate.
Posted in accidents, well control incidents | Tagged accidents, Gulf of Mexico, macondo, offshore oil, oil spill, relief well, safety, well control | Leave a Comment »
July 16, 2010 by offshoreenergy
This presentation is pretty basic for BOE’s very savvy readers, but it includes a good discussion of the differences between Shell’s typical drilling and barrier practices and the Macondo well design.
Posted in accidents, well control incidents | Tagged drilling, Gulf of Mexico, macondo, safety, Shell, well control | 2 Comments »
July 16, 2010 by offshoreenergy
- Tough decision looming?: Assuming the well continues to hold pressure and other surveys don’t indicate any anomalies, will they leave the well shut-in or resume flow through the collection systems? This will be an interesting decision.
- Insignificant detail that is probably only of interest to me: Since 1971 when I started tracking blowout data, a relief well has not been required to halt the flow from any drilling blowout in US (Federal) offshore waters. On several occasions, relief wells were initiated but not needed to stop the flow from a well. Since the Macondo flow is now under control, at least at this time, this record appears to have been sustained. A relief well will still, of course, be needed to kill the well, so this is admittedly a nuanced and largely insignificant detail (especially since nearly 3 months were required to shut-in/control the Macondo well).
Posted in accidents, well control incidents | Tagged accidents, blowouts, Deepwater Horizon, drilling, Gulf of Mexico, macondo, offshore oil, oil spill, safety, well control | Leave a Comment »
July 16, 2010 by offshoreenergy
Only hours after the Macondo well is shut-in there is an earthquake in DC. Coincidence, I think not!
I’ll be submitting a damage claim to BP 🙂
Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments »
July 14, 2010 by offshoreenergy
Capping Stack BOP Before Installation on Well
Here we go ……
- Close rams to shut-in flow from the top while allowing flow through choke and kill lines on sides of capping stack.
- Slowly close kill line.
- Slowly close choke line.
- If the pressure holds through all 3 steps, Secretary Chu does a touchdown dance in the BP control room (BOE exclusive :))
Other:
- Operation will be halted every 6 hours to monitor pressure;
- Ongoing ROV monitoring of well and seafloor;
- Remote sensing systems looking for evidence of leakage outside the wellbore;
- Up to a 48 hour process
Posted in accidents, well control incidents | Tagged accidents, blowouts, Deepwater Horizon, Gulf of Mexico, macondo, offshore oil, oil spill, well control, well integrity test | Leave a Comment »
July 14, 2010 by offshoreenergy
Today I met with Secretary Chu, Marcia McNutt and other scientists and geologists as well as officials from BP and other industry representatives as we continue to prepare and review protocols for the well integrity test – including the seismic mapping run that was made around the well site this morning. As a result of these discussions, we decided that the process may benefit from additional analysis that will be performed tonight and tomorrow. ~ Admiral Allen
This well integrity test delay is probably reasonable and prudent, but one does wonder about the number of scientists involved, and whether the seismic data interpretations are sufficiently accurate to reliably assess fracturing and channeling risks.
At this point, you could argue that a complete shut-in is not necessary. However, the test probably still makes sense for the purpose of gathering useful well integrity data before the relief well hits its target, and for determining whether the well could be shut-in during a lenghty hurricane evacuation.
Posted in accidents, well control incidents | Tagged accidents, blowouts, Deepwater Horizon, Gulf of Mexico, macondo, relief well, safety, well control, well integrity test | Leave a Comment »
July 13, 2010 by offshoreenergy
I tend to ignore the stream of Unified Command media advisories that provide updates on the whereabouts of cabinet officials and tell us how many times they have been to the Gulf Coast. However, today’s message about Secretary Chu caught my attention. I have never met the man, but one senses that he is monitoring the well integrity tests because he is truly interested in the technical details, likes to work with scientists and engineers, is not afraid of a challenge, and feels personally responsible for the success of the intervention work. Let’s hope the Macondo well holds pressure, so that it can remain shut-in until it is killed.
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged blowouts, Deepwater Horizon, DOE, Gulf of Mexico, macondo, Secretary Chu, well control | Leave a Comment »
July 13, 2010 by offshoreenergy
- Presumably BP is very slowly and carefully shutting in Macondo with the newly installed cap. Wellhead pressures are no doubt being very closely monitored. The strength of the 16″ casing is a concern as is the potenital for creating channels back to the surface. Those types of problems must be avoided.
- How concerned was the BP team about attempting the bottom kill without the sealing cap in place? Is the cap needed to create sufficient back-pressure and reduce the weight requirements for the kill mud? Absent the cap, would the required kill weight be high enough to seriously risk fracturing outside the production casing and causing an underground blowout?
- If BP can successfully shut-in the well, that will of course be fantastic news. However, questions must be raised about the sequence of intervention attempts and the reasons why such a sealing cap wasn’t tried sooner. The more we can minimize the screaming and finger-pointing, the more public and private benefit will be derived from this discussion.
- Can we broker a cease-fire in the moratorium debate and focus our collective energy on addressing the immediate technical and policy issues at hand? In the interim, each well should be carefully considered on a case-by-case basis. Water depth is only one consideration, and may prove to be a relatively minor factor in the Macondo blowout.
- We need to create an environment for leadership, ingenuity, and continuous improvement. The focus has to be on comprehensive safety achievement.
Posted in accidents, well control incidents | Tagged accidents, blowouts, Deepwater Horizon, drilling, Gulf of Mexico, macondo, offshore oil, safety, well control | Leave a Comment »
« Newer Posts - Older Posts »
