I doubt any other operator could do anything else than what BP are doing. Drilling relief wells are the primary contingency when something like this happens all over the world. That was known when they got the approval to drill. I plan wells myself here in Norway and contingency releif wells is a part of the game as last option. But these images from the flow is devastating shown live from the gulf.
Relief wells may be the primary method of stopping blowouts, however BP has shown that they can get over the well, but only to the point of collecting some of the oil. I am sure they could devise a way of re-entering the well since they are apparently so darn smart and in a more timely manner than drilling relief wells (wouldn't be as expensive either).
Why BP is going to the trouble of using these exotic methods of stopping the oil flow is beyond me as well. Why can't the get they flow the well from the various points below the riser flange, get the flange off and put on a spool with a proper outlet in order to capture 100% of the oil? Seems fairly straight forward to me Is it that the ROV's are not able to remove the nuts. Of course I have recommended removing some of the nuts in other postings!
This upper spool could also be a foundation for building a stripping stack to re-enter the well. The huge spool they are building now may well be suitable for that if they are installing side outlets.
Auto,
Once again, I disagree. So does BP in their various press-releases. The only way to kill Macondo will be by getting as close to the producing formation as possible, and that means a relief well or two. Opening that stack (even with another LMRP on top of it) would be courting greater disaster. Plus, even were it possible to re-enter down the 9 7/8" x 7" casing string, there's no scenario I can see which would be useful if the blowout's through the casing annulus...
Information or opinions are solely provided for educational and/or discussion purposes on an informal public forum and should not be interpreted as a recommendation for a specific treatment plan, course of action or product/ service. Use of any of this information does not replace consultations with qualified individuals in these respective fields.
Joined: Aug 2009 Gender: Male Posts: 55 Location: Stavanger
Re: Cause of Blowout/Fire on Horizon « Reply #1076 on Jun 11, 2010, 5:53pm »
Agree with Adoubleuk, only way with annulus blow out is relief well. BP knows the flowrate pretty well. They probably had the simulations done the first 1-2 days for a worst case scenario. They know the pressure from wireline runs and most like MDT (fluids samples) during the wireline runs. They also know permeability etc and they know the geometry of the well as well and can run multible scenarious. Here in Norway we have to run these calculations as a part of both the Blow of contingency plan and environmental impact report. I am planning a well now and I have the numbers for a blow out for : annulus, DP and open hole. Worst case in my case is 19000 bbl/day ( 8 1/2" hole, 9 5/8" casing to surface, 505 bar pressure) I guess the numbers where so bad with this casing design (large annullus) and in addition they probably hoped that the riser/DP/BOP reduced the rate (difficult to estimate). But they could have said: Best case 5000 bbl, worst case 40000 bbl and it would have looked better.
Relief wells may be the primary method of stopping blowouts, however BP has shown that they can get over the well, but only to the point of collecting some of the oil. I am sure they could devise a way of re-entering the well since they are apparently so darn smart and in a more timely manner than drilling relief wells (wouldn't be as expensive either).
Why BP is going to the trouble of using these exotic methods of stopping the oil flow is beyond me as well. Why can't the get they flow the well from the various points below the riser flange, get the flange off and put on a spool with a proper outlet in order to capture 100% of the oil? Seems fairly straight forward to me Is it that the ROV's are not able to remove the nuts. Of course I have recommended removing some of the nuts in other postings!
This upper spool could also be a foundation for building a stripping stack to re-enter the well. The huge spool they are building now may well be suitable for that if they are installing side outlets.
Auto, Has there been any update on the bolt situation? They must have a solution by now. Someone suggested splitting the washers, they dont have washers,maybe split the 1 " steel .It also seems that they are not capable of processing full flow yet, they may attempt a solid seal assembly soon? With the ability to adjust flow at the cap & surface? Capturing full flow and where it is going to go seems to be the issue they have now.thx.
Blazer If your talking about the old riser bolts ,then yes.The viking poseidon ROV's had some kind of tool on it yesterday (their feed is sorta yellow and dark on comp)couldn't make out what it was,but it is rather large. They managed to remove one that I saw.
Relief wells may be the primary method of stopping blowouts, however BP has shown that they can get over the well, but only to the point of collecting some of the oil. I am sure they could devise a way of re-entering the well since they are apparently so darn smart and in a more timely manner than drilling relief wells (wouldn't be as expensive either).
Why BP is going to the trouble of using these exotic methods of stopping the oil flow is beyond me as well. Why can't the get they flow the well from the various points below the riser flange, get the flange off and put on a spool with a proper outlet in order to capture 100% of the oil? Seems fairly straight forward to me Is it that the ROV's are not able to remove the nuts. Of course I have recommended removing some of the nuts in other postings!
This upper spool could also be a foundation for building a stripping stack to re-enter the well. The huge spool they are building now may well be suitable for that if they are installing side outlets.
Auto,
Once again, I disagree. So does BP in their various press-releases. The only way to kill Macondo will be by getting as close to the producing formation as possible, and that means a relief well or two. Opening that stack (even with another LMRP on top of it) would be courting greater disaster. Plus, even were it possible to re-enter down the 9 7/8" x 7" casing string, there's no scenario I can see which would be useful if the blowout's through the casing annulus...
AK
I don't expect to convince anyone but the argument that being able to get closer to the well with a relief well rather than re-entering the well baffles me.
Wells are routinely entered with up to 10,000 psi on them - hydraulic workover / snubbing / stripping.
I don't advocate opening the well to the GOM as suggested above so production still has to be captured. Right now wellhead pressure is about 4400 psi with 2200 psi across the BOP. Well pressure could be reduced by flowing the well further after the rams are open - flow up the 5" and riser they have now to a production facility that can handle it - seems like they are lining up to do this. Although there would be sufficient string weight at 5000' to overcome the upward forces so they don't have to snub in the pipe.
Ram to ram stripping and/or using an annular is nothing new. Used in drilling to get back to bottom.
Install stripping stack with rams and an annular. How can it be stabilized? High pressure riser back to surface? Snub from there until pipe heavy?
Fish pipe. It's right there at the surface of the stack - what could be simpler?
Trip to bottom with packer and TCP.
Perforate casing and drop gun to gain access to the annulus just above the formation. They can log to the depth if they want to. THIS IS AS CLOSE AS IT GETS FOR DEPTH CONTROL AND THEY ARE EXACTLY AT THE WELL!
Reduce oil flow rate - easily done since they have control of the well now.
Circulate mud to surface pressure and shut in with pressure on the well if not killed. I wouldn't kill the well since it then risks overpressuring the well during the cement job.
Circulate cement.
Plug back with cement.
This provides a lower overall risk and would get the job done faster and with more certainty than a relief well. Had they started this when they spudded the relief wells the well would have been back under control by now.
Courting disaster? BP has proven they don't know how to get the job done right so I wouldn't be surprised. They are either missing the obvious or the drillers are running the show.
I don't disagree with the relief well but BP need to be working on other positive shut-off measures instead of cofferdams, top hats and that huge chunk of steel they are using to build the next top hat that will have to be pulled off should a hurricane come along.
BP refuses to touch the top flange for some reason and is really the keystone to the entire solution. I wonder why?
Workover folks would be certainly be familiar with the above method. I don't think it's rocket science, but maybe it is, so will have to see if I can get a movie star or Larry King to endorse it. BP may listen then.
Pumper, The coil could probably overcome the flow easily enough but is there coil equipment capable of getting to the depth required? What is the state of the casing/tubulars downhole? Once you open the rams you may be throwing gasoline on the fire,unless there is room to get through the rams? Im not saying it isnt possible, I dont know how they could get coil down there? You would need a bha with floats(underbalanced well/flow to surface) And is it going to be deep enough that they can kill the well?How much volume can you pump through the coil? We threw around the idea before and then it just kind of went away, thankyou for letting everyone know about your experience with running coil in 20000bbl a day. . I would think if they tried this it would be wise to put something in place at the bop to shear it off. Any input from someone in coil snubbing/service/production equipment? I dont think you can pump enough volume to kill this well through coil without it turning into a bottle rocket, but I could be wrong?
Just a personal opinion, but my feeling is that although (small diameter) coil could be useful, it would only be as a means of transporting instrumention downhole. Absolutely no way one could pump anything down coil at a rate which would have a hope of killing this thing with the current blowout flow, let alone its potential full-open rate.
AK
It was a good point of Pumper,
You can go with CT up to 20 000ft, pressure up to 15000 psi/working/, and pump rate at 15 bbls/min. /almost 22 000bbl/d/. Dose not matter because, when you start run in, with kill mud, in depth the flow out will decrease.
You no need to run it closed, you can run it in pump rate from the well head.
The "problem" is SBOP, if they can not unlatch it, they can cut off it from the wellhead, a little problem with 3000ft of dp, but will be a not a big problem.
IF Annular influx /which I disagree 20% to 80% from shoe/ ......, than not a problem to run the CT to bottom, than perforate an squeeze.
P.S. Just a F*** thinking, why they dont shear at this moment, they can charge the accumulators, the shearers are metal to metal......or the reservoir pressure is much bigger than 15 000 psi, BP hide something ???
Joined: Nov 2003 Gender: Male Posts: 193 Location: USA
Re: Cause of Blowout/Fire on Horizon « Reply #1082 on Jun 11, 2010, 10:19pm »
blazer, "snubbing" (forcing the pipe into the hole) is not required but stripping in is required. The answer is the same as how one would strip back to bottom on a deep water rig. Flex joints do not have the necessary pressure integrity so of course needs to be on top of the rams. Is it still on the existing BOP? Many possible problems could come up but not trying should not be an option. Do they expect to get the relief on target the first time?
blazer, "snubbing" (forcing the pipe into the hole) is not required but stripping in is required. The answer is the same as how one would strip back to bottom on a deep water rig. Flex joints do not have the necessary pressure integrity so of course needs to be on top of the rams. Is it still on the existing BOP? Many possible problems could come up but not trying should not be an option. Do they expect to get the relief on target the first time?
I deleted my post but was asking about the flex joint, and if they would have to take it off to put in rams/annular, was going to reword the whole thing. I guess you read it before it was deleted. I had suggested coil tubing before and you had suggested fishing drill pipe prior to stripping. If they successfully fished pipe and stripped in it would make more sense to strip in with pipe rather than coil tubing as they have a drilling rig. Start by removing their current cap.They could bolt a spool with side outlets on top of the existing flex joint(top of bop f/diagram). Have valves on the side outlets of the spool in the closed position and annular and rams in the open position on top of the spool(with another flex joint if needed?) .Attach a new cap.Continue flow to surface up the riser. Rig in flow to surface lines to the side outlets valve on the spool. Open the valves on the side outlets and then close the annular on pipe and strip in to fish/pump. This way they would not be causing any pressure buildup within the flex joint as flow has not been dead ended in the flex joint at anytime, and the well integrity has not been affected by ceasing out flow, no need to shut it in. Sounds like a lot of work for sure but would give you a lot more options down the road. I would think by doing it this way you could safely choke back pressure in the well to the amount it is now with the rams partially opened & the pinched tubular(which I believe is dp).
Re: Cause of Blowout/Fire on Horizon « Reply #1084 on Jun 12, 2010, 1:53am »
It is curious to me that we do not hear any talk from BP of flowing the well on the C/K lines. Unless they have a good reason not to, it appears to me that they could do more good pulling fom the lowest points of stack, where the greatest pressure is, and this may help reduce the oil coming out top of stack. BP stated long ago they felt there were cement and formation material restrictions in the wellbore, this was their explanation for the lower than expected BOP pressure readings. The BOP pressure readings we have were taken May 25, I bet they are a little less now due to the lower gas/oil ratio (half of what it was originally). I tend to feel like Mr. Auto does, I would like to see sufficient well information released whereby intervention methods could be explored. I guess some of the big variables are: 1. Knowing if the flow is annular, up production casing or both. 2. Knowing what is in the BOP stack, and position of 9-7/8" casing hanger/seal. 3. The integrity of the 16" casing or other surrounding strings.
Re: Cause of Blowout/Fire on Horizon « Reply #1085 on Jun 12, 2010, 2:34am »
I'll put forth the theory that the reason BP isn't doing more (perhaps) "conventional" things is down to one reason - fear. Fear of the US political establishment and fear of pubic opinion. They got slammed so hard so fast when this thing happened (it wasn't fifteen minutes after the rig sank when they were forced practically at gunpoint to agree to pay all and everything forever (and not wrongly, I'd add), and the screams for money and the relentless visuals of the damage are forcing them to play the whole thing very conservatively......more conservatively than any bunch of oilfield pros might play it were they not under the hammer/microscope/infinite liability that BP is.
There's no question they screwed up in a very major way, and all the upset people have the right to be freaked out. The place I LIVE is next to get ruined by this mess. But the level of pure hate and political rhetoric is over the top. We're literally ready to throw out the baby with the bathwater, so to speak, as regards the drilling ban and like actions. The US government is so determined to keep BP neutered and timid that I seriously doubt anything like what would even APPEAR on the evening news as "risky" will happen. If somebody suggested something that would involve OPENING that well in the least way, there would be mobs in the street. It's bad enough already without that, with all the a**-kicking BS and all being thrown around.
Sorry if my comments lent a "chat room" atmosphere....
It is curious to me that we do not hear any talk from BP of flowing the well on the C/K lines. Unless they have a good reason not to, it appears to me that they could do more good pulling fom the lowest points of stack, where the greatest pressure is, and this may help reduce the oil coming out top of stack.
Information or opinions are solely provided for educational and/or discussion purposes on an informal public forum and should not be interpreted as a recommendation for a specific treatment plan, course of action or product/ service. Use of any of this information does not replace consultations with individuals qualified in these respective fields.
Once again, I disagree. So does BP in their various press-releases. The only way to kill Macondo will be by getting as close to the producing formation as possible, and that means a relief well or two. Opening that stack (even with another LMRP on top of it) would be courting greater disaster. Plus, even were it possible to re-enter down the 9 7/8" x 7" casing string, there's no scenario I can see which would be useful if the blowout's through the casing annulus...
AK
I don't expect to convince anyone but the argument that being able to get closer to the well with a relief well rather than re-entering the well baffles me.
Wells are routinely entered with up to 10,000 psi on them - hydraulic workover / snubbing / stripping.
I don't advocate opening the well to the GOM as suggested above so production still has to be captured. Right now wellhead pressure is about 4400 psi with 2200 psi across the BOP. Well pressure could be reduced by flowing the well further after the rams are open - flow up the 5" and riser they have now to a production facility that can handle it - seems like they are lining up to do this. Although there would be sufficient string weight at 5000' to overcome the upward forces so they don't have to snub in the pipe.
Ram to ram stripping and/or using an annular is nothing new. Used in drilling to get back to bottom.
Install stripping stack with rams and an annular. How can it be stabilized? High pressure riser back to surface? Snub from there until pipe heavy?
Fish pipe. It's right there at the surface of the stack - what could be simpler?
Trip to bottom with packer and TCP.
Perforate casing and drop gun to gain access to the annulus just above the formation. They can log to the depth if they want to. THIS IS AS CLOSE AS IT GETS FOR DEPTH CONTROL AND THEY ARE EXACTLY AT THE WELL!
Reduce oil flow rate - easily done since they have control of the well now.
Circulate mud to surface pressure and shut in with pressure on the well if not killed. I wouldn't kill the well since it then risks overpressuring the well during the cement job.
Circulate cement.
Plug back with cement.
This provides a lower overall risk and would get the job done faster and with more certainty than a relief well. Had they started this when they spudded the relief wells the well would have been back under control by now.
Courting disaster? BP has proven they don't know how to get the job done right so I wouldn't be surprised. They are either missing the obvious or the drillers are running the show.
I don't disagree with the relief well but BP need to be working on other positive shut-off measures instead of cofferdams, top hats and that huge chunk of steel they are using to build the next top hat that will have to be pulled off should a hurricane come along.
BP refuses to touch the top flange for some reason and is really the keystone to the entire solution. I wonder why?
Workover folks would be certainly be familiar with the above method. I don't think it's rocket science, but maybe it is, so will have to see if I can get a movie star or Larry King to endorse it. BP may listen then.
I really did not read much after the claim that it is OK to re-enter the well. The well is seriouslly comprimised and flowing 10 - 20 BOPD. If a dynamic kill was utilised the pressure required would be significant.
I don't expect to convince anyone but the argument that being able to get closer to the well with a relief well rather than re-entering the well baffles me.
Wells are routinely entered with up to 10,000 psi on them - hydraulic workover / snubbing / stripping.
I don't advocate opening the well to the GOM as suggested above so production still has to be captured. Right now wellhead pressure is about 4400 psi with 2200 psi across the BOP. Well pressure could be reduced by flowing the well further after the rams are open - flow up the 5" and riser they have now to a production facility that can handle it - seems like they are lining up to do this. Although there would be sufficient string weight at 5000' to overcome the upward forces so they don't have to snub in the pipe.
Ram to ram stripping and/or using an annular is nothing new. Used in drilling to get back to bottom.
Install stripping stack with rams and an annular. How can it be stabilized? High pressure riser back to surface? Snub from there until pipe heavy?
Fish pipe. It's right there at the surface of the stack - what could be simpler?
Trip to bottom with packer and TCP.
Perforate casing and drop gun to gain access to the annulus just above the formation. They can log to the depth if they want to. THIS IS AS CLOSE AS IT GETS FOR DEPTH CONTROL AND THEY ARE EXACTLY AT THE WELL!
Reduce oil flow rate - easily done since they have control of the well now.
Circulate mud to surface pressure and shut in with pressure on the well if not killed. I wouldn't kill the well since it then risks overpressuring the well during the cement job.
Circulate cement.
Plug back with cement.
This provides a lower overall risk and would get the job done faster and with more certainty than a relief well. Had they started this when they spudded the relief wells the well would have been back under control by now.
Courting disaster? BP has proven they don't know how to get the job done right so I wouldn't be surprised. They are either missing the obvious or the drillers are running the show.
I don't disagree with the relief well but BP need to be working on other positive shut-off measures instead of cofferdams, top hats and that huge chunk of steel they are using to build the next top hat that will have to be pulled off should a hurricane come along.
BP refuses to touch the top flange for some reason and is really the keystone to the entire solution. I wonder why?
Workover folks would be certainly be familiar with the above method. I don't think it's rocket science, but maybe it is, so will have to see if I can get a movie star or Larry King to endorse it. BP may listen then.
I really did not read much after the claim that it is OK to re-enter the well. The well is seriouslly comprimised and flowing 10 - 20 BOPD. If a dynamic kill was utilised the pressure required would be significant.
Absolutely correct Holdril. And to all of those poeple who are advocating snubbing, coil tubing etc etc., remember that this well hasn't been designed to take it. FORGET IT and move on. If BP thought it was practical, they'd be doing it. FORGET IT.
P.S. I hate to state this but I wish the government would back-off their a**-kicking of BP. OK they screwed up, but at least so far they have the money to pay for their sins. Much more from Washington and there will be no money left - the BP stock price will have fallen too far.
Also, BP does not equal British Petroleum. In the USA it means Amoco (American Oil company and Arco(Atlantic Richfield). I imagine BP rue the day they ever bought these two companies.......
I'll put forth the theory that the reason BP isn't doing more (perhaps) "conventional" things is down to one reason - fear. Fear of the US political establishment and fear of pubic opinion. They got slammed so hard so fast when this thing happened (it wasn't fifteen minutes after the rig sank when they were forced practically at gunpoint to agree to pay all and everything forever (and not wrongly, I'd add), and the screams for money and the relentless visuals of the damage are forcing them to play the whole thing very conservatively......more conservatively than any bunch of oilfield pros might play it were they not under the hammer/microscope/infinite liability that BP is.
There's no question they screwed up in a very major way, and all the upset people have the right to be freaked out. The place I LIVE is next to get ruined by this mess. But the level of pure hate and political rhetoric is over the top. We're literally ready to throw out the baby with the bathwater, so to speak, as regards the drilling ban and like actions. The US government is so determined to keep BP neutered and timid that I seriously doubt anything like what would even APPEAR on the evening news as "risky" will happen. If somebody suggested something that would involve OPENING that well in the least way, there would be mobs in the street. It's bad enough already without that, with all the a**-kicking BS and all being thrown around.
Sorry if my comments lent a "chat room" atmosphere....
Webby,
While I agree with you on this, I suspect there are additional factors at work here.
Firstly, the MMS. This body has received severe criticism already. So I reckon right now they're applying as much due diligence as possible. BP has come up with a plan: the current LMRP cap, which is working imperfectly as predicted. They're preparing their C&K feed to the Q4000. And they have their longer-term other feed to a tanker.
No doubt these plans have been approved by the MMS. Even if BP decided they wanted now to re-enter the well at this stage, I very much doubt that the MMS would be very receptive to them calling up and saying"look, we've changed our minds, so will you approve a re-entry"... Especially given that the condition of the BOP and the well itself is evidently still open to question.
Secondly, Transocean, already the object of a public slanging match with BP. They've So far lost a number of men, and a very expensive drilling rig. They've got two rigs drilling the relief wells (with all the inherent risks that implies), and a drillship performing the risky task of collecting a certain amount of the oil from the blowout. If BP now turned round to them and said "look, we want you to unlatch that cap (providing full flow to the ocean once more), try to latch onto that BOP, and re-enter the well", Transocean would almost certainly refuse the job. They're very exposed already.
And of course there's the public opinion issues you've already mentioned.
Even under the present circumstances, I personally would not like to be working on any of those three rigs.
I don't think a re-entry will happen for now, even if it were feasable. Too risky by far.
Information or opinions are solely provided for educational and/or discussion purposes on an informal public forum and should not be interpreted as a recommendation for a specific treatment plan, course of action or product/ service. Use of any of this information does not replace consultations with qualified individuals in these respective fields.
Re: Cause of Blowout/Fire on Horizon « Reply #1090 on Jun 12, 2010, 9:33am »
None of us like what is going on, least of all us that have made the industry our way of life, BP have made it quite clear what their intentions are, over the next month or so, that is to contain as much of the flow as possible and clean up the mess, Ken Well is constantly holding briefings and keeping the public informed, (and doing a bloody good job of it), If BP thought there was a quicker and better way they would be doing it, In fact the first idea is much the same as the one they are doing now, the a**kicking they have had from the start is much to blame for the failure of success you can’t blame people for not talking when ever word they say is twisted and taken out of context,
To change something that is working at +/- 70 percent to something that is still to be proven make no sense I think basically this discussion has played itself out and is now repeating itself just for the sake of talking, In the past week over 30 post have been deleted by their author, that’s more than we have had in the past seven years, the drilling of the relief well is not the main cost here the cleanup and the laying off people is
« Last Edit: Jun 12, 2010, 10:44am by Adminstrator »
not read much after the claim that it is OK to re-enter the well. The well is seriouslly comprimised and flowing 10 - 20 BOPD. If a dynamic kill was utilised the pressure required would be significant.
I know, most after that was blah, blah, blah, no one believes it anyway because of a can't do ATTITUDE, not because it physically can't be done (so far). BP doesn't know and neither does anyone else, so it's guessing. We'll see how the history book is written on this one.
Isn't a relief well a dynamic well kill? Just from a different source?
Re: Cause of Blowout/Fire on Horizon « Reply #1092 on Jun 12, 2010, 12:25pm »
I heard today on the radio (the national French news service) that BP + 'competent US authorities' have once more revised their figures for daily flow into the GOM from Macondo to + / - 40,000 bbl / day.
Has anyone elswhere heard this, or has the French radio used rumour instead of fact, without checking their sources?
I recall a few weeks back on the original thread that someone posted a message expressing scepticism about the original reports of 5000 bbl / day, an opinion which has proved to be well founded. In the same post anything from 30,000 to 95,000 bbl / day was proposed. If it's 40,000 still getting out, plus average 15,000 being collected, that wasn't a bad guess.
The odd thing is, I can't find another reference to this 40,000 figure on the internet yet. Maybe I should phone the radio station.
Information or opinions are solely provided for educational and/or discussion purposes on an informal public forum and should not be interpreted as a recommendation for a specific treatment plan, course of action or product/ service. Use of any of this information does not replace consultations with qualified individuals in these respective fields.
Re: Cause of Blowout/Fire on Horizon « Reply #1093 on Jun 12, 2010, 12:45pm »
I have a further question following on from my last one about possibly conflicting reports. It regards pressures within the BOP.
A while back, BP released a figure on this, somewhere in the 3000 psi range, if I recall correctly. Yet on this site some people said that there was no direct port via the wellhead through which pressures could be monitored, an opinion which (having looked at the schematic) may well be true.
Does anyone know how BP derived their figure? Would it have been through computer modelling, or maybe data acquired during the 'top kill', direct observation, or is it just an estimate based on conditions prior to the blowout and logging data?
Information or opinions are solely provided for educational and/or discussion purposes on an informal public forum and should not be interpreted as a recommendation for a specific treatment plan, course of action or product/ service. Use of any of this information does not replace consultations with qualified individuals in these respective fields.
Re: Cause of Blowout/Fire on Horizon « Reply #1094 on Jun 12, 2010, 12:56pm »
AK, the 40K number has been reported on MSM here in the States as well. I would guess that is too low as well if BP is now saying they'll be collecting that much per day. The "worse case" scenario that BP gave way back in the beginning (that wasn't released publicly) was over 100K per day.
Of course they have every reason to want to minimize the actual amount of oil leaking so who the heck knows what the real numbers are. The vultures are circling, rumor on the Street is the Hedgie vultures see BP as a takeover target. They'll be shorted out of existence, similiar to Lehman Bros., their CDS spread has skyrocketed...Now we get to see if BP is too big to fail as well...
Joined: Nov 2003 Gender: Male Posts: 193 Location: USA
Re: Cause of Blowout/Fire on Horizon « Reply #1095 on Jun 12, 2010, 1:10pm »
Just thinking way ahead to the well kill process. I would think this will significantly increase flow out by 500 - 1000 gpm during that time. I wonder how BP plans on managing the returns. Should only be for 8 hours or less though.
Re: Cause of Blowout/Fire on Horizon « Reply #1096 on Jun 12, 2010, 2:26pm »
BP will begin testing a second rig-based system to catch oil this weekend. It would catch an extra 10,000 barrels a day, bringing daily total recovery capacity to 28,000 barrels, said Ken Wells, BP's senior vice president for exploration and production.
Just thinking way ahead to the well kill process. I would think this will significantly increase flow out by 500 - 1000 gpm during that time. I wonder how BP plans on managing the returns. Should only be for 8 hours or less though.
Auto,
Hmm. Good point. 1000 gpm equals the equivalent of 34,285 bbl / day extra.
Though of course BP hasn't said anything yet about exactly how they're planning the kill with the relief wells, and may not even make it public knowledge. Bit premature for that.
An eight-hour pumping operation sounds highly optimistic to me.
Information or opinions are solely provided for educational and/or discussion purposes on an informal public forum and should not be interpreted as a recommendation for a specific treatment plan, course of action or product/ service. Use of any of this information does not replace consultations with qualified individuals in these respective fields.
Joined: Nov 2003 Gender: Male Posts: 42 Location: Maadi Cairo Egypt
Re: Cause of Blowout/Fire on Horizon « Reply #1099 on Jun 12, 2010, 4:09pm »
I was wondering my self if they are hiding things But man O man if you suggest anything here people get all jumpy ...lol Now that there is a stright pipe into the well to start killing from if we could get to bottom and yes they are right 1.5 or 1 3/4 inch but I have feeling the first relief well will not kill it alone and having a bottom kill in place will support it and if anything doing something is better than waiting gives people hope and its not as hard to do when they change out the oil capture tool to add Coil option onto next one anyways if 20k TO 40 K of oil is a flowing with only a 2 K pressure drop in the BOPs we have 3 inch plus of space on each side of the pipe caught in the shear rams to get down that hole with and drilling out the rams has been done before I am sure I know I drilled out a closed TIW from surface with a coil its hard But here you have 1600 m before you get there
The Driller’s Club is constructed around many oil field forums that allow drilling and oil field oriented people to ask and answer questions relating to subjects within the industry. Membership is free and you can pick your own user name
Gordon, Elias & Seely, LLP are
maritime lawyers serving injured offshore oilfield workers throughout the world
![[image]](http://www.drillfloor.com/the%20driller%27s%20club.jpg "[image]")
![[Search This Thread]](http://images.proboards.com/search2.gif "[Search This Thread]")
![[Share Topic]](http://images.proboards.com/new/buttons/share.png "[Share Topic]")
Author
Logged
![[avatar]](http://images.proboards.com/avatars/boyandpc.gif "[avatar]")
![[homepage]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/www_sm.gif "[homepage]")
. I would think if they tried this it would be wise to put something in place at the bop to shear it off. Any input from someone in coil snubbing/service/production equipment? I dont think you can pump enough volume to kill this well through coil without it turning into a bottle rocket, but I could be wrong?
??? 
![[avatar]](http://www.tellumo.co.uk/brent%20storm%20100.jpg "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://images.proboards.com/avatars/devil.gif "[avatar]")
![[yim]](http://images.proboards.com/yim.gif "[yim]")