4 ms·

I don't profess to understand the challenges of developing an oil well 5000 ft beneath sea level, but does anyone know why there isn't a valve installed that co

I don't profess to understand the challenges of developing an oil well 5000 ft beneath sea level, but does anyone know why there isn't a valve installed that could be shut off by a submersible? What I do know is BP initially said it was roughly 1000 barrels/day when they knew it was probably more. So the rate is now at 25 times the original estimate. That's either incompetence or PR disaster control at it's worst.

briancooley 16y ago
There is. It's a 450 ton device called a blowout preventer It didn't activate and they have been trying to do it manually for several days. I work in the oil and gas industry and live along the gulf coast. It's a heart wrenching situation.
- vaksel 16y ago
  wasn't there supposed to be a secondary device, that cost $500,000 that they decided not to install saying it was "too expensive"
  - briancooley 16y ago
    I don't know anything about their design decisions and shouldn't comment on them. However, my understanding is that a secondary device is not mandated in the US. If that's true, I expect it will change before more deepwater drilling is permitted.
    - vaksel 16y ago
      yeah it's not mandatory...still, since they made something like 36 billion in 1 quarter...and since the cost a single spill would cost way more than $500,000...you'd think at $500K it'd be a cost effective decision to install it
      - briancooley 16y ago
        Please don't put me in the position of defending BP. I have no affiliation with them, and I don't know all the details. However, your argument here either is ignoring elements of the decision-making process or isn't logical, and your number ($36BB) is off by nearly an order of magnitude. edit: In the interest of not sounding mysterious, I'll add that you have to consider the likelihood of an event and then the likelihood of all the safety systems failing to determine whether another layer of protection has any value. Of course, now that a blowout has occurred, and the safety system has failed, it is human nature to look back and play Monday morning quarterback. The question that is bugging me is why the safety system failed. Every refinery and chemical plant in the US relies on safety systems to prevent catastrophic incidents, and it is a huge concern when they are activated, let alone fail. We review safety systems and test them regularly.
        jacquesm 16y ago
        I don't think it is Monday morning quarterbacking as much as it is adding a datapoint to a set with apparently too little data in it in the first place.
  - pinko 16y ago
    Yes, an acoustic switch. Google for "Leaking Oil Well Lacked Safeguard Device" for a good WSJ article on it.
    - by 16y ago
      But from reading the article http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704423504575212031417936798.html http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870442350457521... the acoustic control just activates the blowout preventer, and the dead-man switch should do the same thing. But I don't know anything beyond reading the article.
  - MaysonL 16y ago
    note this article: "BP Fought Safety Measures at Deepwater Oil Rigs" http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/bp-fought-safety-measures-deepwater-oil-rigs/story?id=10521078 http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/bp-fought-safety-measures-deep...
- stuntgoat 16y ago
  do you know what type of BOP they are using? And why it might not be working? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blowout_preventer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blowout_preventer Wikipedia says there are 2 types. Could be there is some sediment somewhere causing a mechanical failure? Or maybe some hydraulic fluids need to be heated up? If it is going to take months to fix it using methods that have never been tried at those depths, it seems that spending some time trying to make that device work would be a good investment. Also, can we get a temporary stackoverflow ( no pun intended ) for engineers working to solve this problem?
cosmicray 16y ago
From what I've read, the leaks are occurring from the remains of the drill pipe/casing. That was 5000-ft long, vertical, and connected the Deepwater Horizon to the blowout preventer on the sea bed. As the rig sunk, the pipe detached and tumbled/bent/kinked. Those kinks are where the leaks are. How much was leaking on day one, and how much is leaking now, may well be different. IMHO (and I'm not in the industry, but here goes) the solution of least regret is to not try to stop the flow at the sea bed (at least not right now today). The better solution (and a complicated one) is to cut that pipe, try to connect a new (non-kinked) pipe, and take everything that well shaft is sending at the surface. Separate the stranded gas and flare it off, then dump the remainder into as many tankers/barges as are necessary and haul it to shore for processing. What I am suggesting is costly, but I'd be willing to bet that most of the pieces to do this are currently available. Forget about trying to stop the flow, instead take the flow and do something with it (other than dumping it into the Gulf).
- jacquesm 16y ago
  I get it that your ideas are presented with good intent, but since you preface your idea with 'I'm not in the industry' I'm guessing that all those bright minds that are in the industry and that have studied this stuff for a long long time have discarded that particular idea on its lack of merits long ago, or they're working on it right now. It's pretty rare that an outsider with knowledge gleaned from the (very much dumbed down) media will come up with a solution in a case like this. The problem with being an outsider is that if you think of a 5000 feet long pipe as a simple straw that you're going to cut off somewhere and attach something new to while it is merrily arcing it's way around the ocean based on the exit force of the oil escaping from it that simply grasping it might require the development of a bunch of new tech and attaching a new chunk of pipe to it (assuming no significant leaks below the point where you've picked it up) is probably not that simple either at the depth we're talking about. It could be quite a while before they manage to do that, so I'm guessing their first priority is to get the outflow under control, everything else is of much lower priority. Deep sea stuff is very difficult, and a mile of standing water is a heck of a challenge. Kudos for creative thinking though :)

briancooley 16y ago

There is. It's a 450 ton device called a blowout preventer It didn't activate and they have been trying to do it manually for several days. I work in the oil and gas industry and live along the gulf coast. It's a heart wrenching situation.

vaksel 16y ago
wasn't there supposed to be a secondary device, that cost $500,000 that they decided not to install saying it was "too expensive"
- briancooley 16y ago
  I don't know anything about their design decisions and shouldn't comment on them. However, my understanding is that a secondary device is not mandated in the US. If that's true, I expect it will change before more deepwater drilling is permitted.
  - vaksel 16y ago
    yeah it's not mandatory...still, since they made something like 36 billion in 1 quarter...and since the cost a single spill would cost way more than $500,000...you'd think at $500K it'd be a cost effective decision to install it
    - briancooley 16y ago
      Please don't put me in the position of defending BP. I have no affiliation with them, and I don't know all the details. However, your argument here either is ignoring elements of the decision-making process or isn't logical, and your number ($36BB) is off by nearly an order of magnitude. edit: In the interest of not sounding mysterious, I'll add that you have to consider the likelihood of an event and then the likelihood of all the safety systems failing to determine whether another layer of protection has any value. Of course, now that a blowout has occurred, and the safety system has failed, it is human nature to look back and play Monday morning quarterback. The question that is bugging me is why the safety system failed. Every refinery and chemical plant in the US relies on safety systems to prevent catastrophic incidents, and it is a huge concern when they are activated, let alone fail. We review safety systems and test them regularly.
      - jacquesm 16y ago
        I don't think it is Monday morning quarterbacking as much as it is adding a datapoint to a set with apparently too little data in it in the first place.
- pinko 16y ago
  Yes, an acoustic switch. Google for "Leaking Oil Well Lacked Safeguard Device" for a good WSJ article on it.
  - by 16y ago
    But from reading the article http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704423504575212031417936798.html http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870442350457521... the acoustic control just activates the blowout preventer, and the dead-man switch should do the same thing. But I don't know anything beyond reading the article.
- MaysonL 16y ago
  note this article: "BP Fought Safety Measures at Deepwater Oil Rigs" http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/bp-fought-safety-measures-deepwater-oil-rigs/story?id=10521078 http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/bp-fought-safety-measures-deep...
stuntgoat 16y ago
do you know what type of BOP they are using? And why it might not be working? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blowout_preventer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blowout_preventer Wikipedia says there are 2 types. Could be there is some sediment somewhere causing a mechanical failure? Or maybe some hydraulic fluids need to be heated up? If it is going to take months to fix it using methods that have never been tried at those depths, it seems that spending some time trying to make that device work would be a good investment. Also, can we get a temporary stackoverflow ( no pun intended ) for engineers working to solve this problem?

cosmicray 16y ago

From what I've read, the leaks are occurring from the remains of the drill pipe/casing. That was 5000-ft long, vertical, and connected the Deepwater Horizon to the blowout preventer on the sea bed. As the rig sunk, the pipe detached and tumbled/bent/kinked. Those kinks are where the leaks are. How much was leaking on day one, and how much is leaking now, may well be different. IMHO (and I'm not in the industry, but here goes) the solution of least regret is to not try to stop the flow at the sea bed (at least not right now today). The better solution (and a complicated one) is to cut that pipe, try to connect a new (non-kinked) pipe, and take everything that well shaft is sending at the surface. Separate the stranded gas and flare it off, then dump the remainder into as many tankers/barges as are necessary and haul it to shore for processing. What I am suggesting is costly, but I'd be willing to bet that most of the pieces to do this are currently available. Forget about trying to stop the flow, instead take the flow and do something with it (other than dumping it into the Gulf).

jacquesm 16y ago
I get it that your ideas are presented with good intent, but since you preface your idea with 'I'm not in the industry' I'm guessing that all those bright minds that are in the industry and that have studied this stuff for a long long time have discarded that particular idea on its lack of merits long ago, or they're working on it right now. It's pretty rare that an outsider with knowledge gleaned from the (very much dumbed down) media will come up with a solution in a case like this. The problem with being an outsider is that if you think of a 5000 feet long pipe as a simple straw that you're going to cut off somewhere and attach something new to while it is merrily arcing it's way around the ocean based on the exit force of the oil escaping from it that simply grasping it might require the development of a bunch of new tech and attaching a new chunk of pipe to it (assuming no significant leaks below the point where you've picked it up) is probably not that simple either at the depth we're talking about. It could be quite a while before they manage to do that, so I'm guessing their first priority is to get the outflow under control, everything else is of much lower priority. Deep sea stuff is very difficult, and a mile of standing water is a heck of a challenge. Kudos for creative thinking though :)