#Login Register


  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
Home 


Everybody Ready for Another Oil Rig Explosion in the Gulf of Mexico? VIDEO
11-17-2012, 06:37 AM #16
Tacolover II Member
Posts:427 Threads:59 Joined:Feb 2011

Now that you get to Oil producing areas notice the difference. Platform/not rig

Like I said-dumbass using a torch

http://www.khou.com/news/local/Coast-Gua...68691.html
11-17-2012, 06:51 AM #17
Tacolover II Member
Posts:427 Threads:59 Joined:Feb 2011
(11-17-2012, 06:25 AM)JayRodney Wrote:  Just read the initial reports which stated "Oil Rig", which was obviously a misleading title, and yes... environmental impacts SHOULD be minimal in that scenario.
I still treasure the pelicans covered in sludge, nothing says we've made you our bitches in the same way as that does.


"nothing says we've made you our bitches in the same way as that does."

lmao.gif I know, I know, just a Schill for Big Oil. lmao.gif

Just irritates me that people reporting does not know what they are talking about. So who's to blame here?

The responsibility is on Black Elk but the blame is the idiot that cut into that line with a torch. Several lawsuits here no doubt.

Looking at the pictures there are/were several large storage tanks...
11-17-2012, 07:19 AM #18
Octo Mother Superior
Posts:42,612 Threads:1,469 Joined:Feb 2011
Shill or not, yer still one of the good guys drunk.gif
11-17-2012, 09:14 AM #19
Tacolover II Member
Posts:427 Threads:59 Joined:Feb 2011
(11-17-2012, 07:19 AM)Octo Wrote:  Shill or not, yer still one of the good guys drunk.gif


Octo a hint. I am no and never been a Schill for anybody.
11-17-2012, 03:50 PM #20
オタマジャクシ Member
Posts:1,310 Threads:32 Joined:Nov 2012
(11-17-2012, 06:37 AM)Tacolover II Wrote:  Now that you get to Oil producing areas notice the difference. Platform/not rig

Like I said-dumbass using a torch

http://www.khou.com/news/local/Coast-Gua...68691.html


Good info. The press doesn't know the difference between a cutting torch and a welding rig (two completely different technologies).

From your source:
"The process for cutting the pipe calls for a “cold-cutting device,” or a non-sparking tool, Hoffman said. However, he confirmed that a cutting torch was used instead, which ignited the vapors in the pipe."

On Heck BP Macondo:
1. Did you read the BOP analysis in the joint investigative report? The report appears to say that most of the BOP worked, the shear rams engaged, but the pressure had kinked the pipe so it was in the BOP at a diagonal and the jaws couldn't cut it.

2. Was there any reason for replacing the drilling mud in the pipes with seawater prior to putting the final cement plug in place (other than saving money on mud)?

11-17-2012, 03:55 PM #21
Octo Mother Superior
Posts:42,612 Threads:1,469 Joined:Feb 2011
(11-17-2012, 09:14 AM)Tacolover II Wrote:  
(11-17-2012, 07:19 AM)Octo Wrote:  Shill or not, yer still one of the good guys drunk.gif


Octo a hint. I am no and never been a Schill for anybody.


I know that. hug.gif
11-17-2012, 04:43 PM #22
Tacolover II Member
Posts:427 Threads:59 Joined:Feb 2011
(11-17-2012, 03:50 PM)オタマジャクシ Wrote:  
(11-17-2012, 06:37 AM)Tacolover II Wrote:  Now that you get to Oil producing areas notice the difference. Platform/not rig

Like I said-dumbass using a torch

http://www.khou.com/news/local/Coast-Gua...68691.html


Good info. The press doesn't know the difference between a cutting torch and a welding rig (two completely different technologies).

From your source:
"The process for cutting the pipe calls for a “cold-cutting device,” or a non-sparking tool, Hoffman said. However, he confirmed that a cutting torch was used instead, which ignited the vapors in the pipe."


On Heck BP Macondo:
1. Did you read the BOP analysis in the joint investigative report? The report appears to say that most of the BOP worked, the shear rams engaged, but the pressure had kinked the pipe so it was in the BOP at a diagonal and the jaws couldn't cut it.

2. Was there any reason for replacing the drilling mud in the pipes with seawater prior to putting the final cement plug in place (other than saving money on mud)?


Macondo? I did not read the analysis. The conclusion shear rams worked but low pressure prevented the jaws to cut through the drill pipe sounds feasable.

I was wondering why there were 2 pieces of drill pipe coming out through the BOP stack. Pictured after Drilling Riser was cut away. Drill Pipe is extremely heavy/thick and was wondering if the rams could handle 2 joints of drill pipe. There should only be 1. I share the same watering hole of the owner of the company that built the shear rams on top of the Macondo BOP. He doesn't talk about it much and he and his company Variable Bore Rams were cleared of any wrongdoing in that failure. Transocean owned the BOP and had leased the rams and from what I gather is they were well past service limit time to be refurbished....By Transocean. That Ram set on top of a Cameron BOP stack...

2) Yes the procedure in plugging a well is to remove heavy drilling fluids and replace with lighter seawater IF and only IF the Negative Pressure Test indicates there is not pressure coming up from the casing ID. Well the personnel proceeded without a verification of the Negative Pressure Test. Why I do not know. Halliburton is in charge of that. or Should be

The reason you remove heavy fluids and replace with seawater is those heavy fluids are meant to be circulating at all times. Those fluids will set up and harden like cement and when you drill through it again to complete the well can create problems. You do not want alot of foreign material in the matrix of the well.
11-17-2012, 06:13 PM #23
オタマジャクシ Member
Posts:1,310 Threads:32 Joined:Nov 2012
It sounds like you are saying BP put schedule ahead of cured casing cement.

http://ccrm.berkeley.edu/pdfs_papers/DHS...an2011.pdf
The above says the cement was tested before it was cured, testing might have damaged the uncured cement, and that they should have used higher test pressures after the cement full cured.

The article actually has a shopping list of things that were done incorrectly.

The actual BP report says:
1. The annulus cement failed.
2. The Shoe track (double check valves) failed.
3. The negative pressure test was accepted even though there were anomalies.
4. The gas influx wasn't recognized soon enough.
5. The well control response wasn't successful
6. The diversion to the mud gas separator vented the gas onto the rig.
7. The fire/gas system didn't prevent ignition (the generators were the ignition source).
8. The BOP emergency mode did not seal well.

Saw a picture in an offshore engineer pdf file of the sheared off riser - two pipes, one casing - not good.

Two of the BP people on site were charged with manslaughter so apparently they insisted on pushing the schedule in spite of questionable test results.

Awful lot of bad juju for one well. How does that happen?
11-17-2012, 06:19 PM #24
JayRodney ⓐⓛⓘⓔⓝ
Posts:31,283 Threads:1,438 Joined:Feb 2011
Satan İmage


chuckle.gif


wonder.gif
11-17-2012, 09:46 PM #25
Tacolover II Member
Posts:427 Threads:59 Joined:Feb 2011
(11-17-2012, 06:13 PM)オタマジャクシ Wrote:  It sounds like you are saying BP put schedule ahead of cured casing cement.

http://ccrm.berkeley.edu/pdfs_papers/DHS...an2011.pdf
The above says the cement was tested before it was cured, testing might have damaged the uncured cement, and that they should have used higher test pressures after the cement full cured.

The article actually has a shopping list of things that were done incorrectly.

The actual BP report says:
1. The annulus cement failed.
2. The Shoe track (double check valves) failed.
3. The negative pressure test was accepted even though there were anomalies.
4. The gas influx wasn't recognized soon enough.
5. The well control response wasn't successful
6. The diversion to the mud gas separator vented the gas onto the rig.
7. The fire/gas system didn't prevent ignition (the generators were the ignition source).
8. The BOP emergency mode did not seal well.

Saw a picture in an offshore engineer pdf file of the sheared off riser - two pipes, one casing - not good.

Two of the BP people on site were charged with manslaughter so apparently they insisted on pushing the schedule in spite of questionable test results.

Awful lot of bad juju for one well. How does that happen?


Some of these are incidents that happened due to a failure of some kind and listed more tan 1-time. Example 1 and 2 The annulus cement failed due to a shoe track check valve did not function.

4,5 & 6 The mud diversion gas separator vented on the rig floor because the3 gas influx was not recognized fast enough, they lost control of the well and gone beyond the well control response.

7 The fire/gas system didn't prevent the ignition because the #6 The mud/gas diverson separator vented out on the rig floor instead of out of the side of vessel.

8 Bop blind shear rams failed so the well could not be sealed which is the ultimate last step/emergency mode. Again 2 joints of drill pipe in BOP and reduced pressure co cut through drill pipe.



A lot had to happen/malfunction for this to occur. From what I understand there was a breakdown in both equipment and human error. Remember this is BP's synopsis. I did not know the annulus cement failed. It was that cement job that created initial heat that began the chain reaction of melting of the methane hydrates.

Cement jobs can be trickey and there are different slurries/matrix's to perform different tasks. There has been talk about these different slurries. The mix on Macondo was a nitrogen charged cement that is lighter

Annulus is the space between the casing and the borehole. You have to drill a larger hole than the outside diameter of the casing to allow it to pass through the borehole. So to seal that space a cement job is performed. Not wanting a lot of weight hanging on the formation walls than can cause a cave-in many companies use a lighter nitrogen charged cement.

Now when you guide the casing down the borehole there are tools to so called "float" the casing down. There is tremendous weight involved here. Say they were running 3000 feet of 9 5/8 inch casing at 53.5 lbs/foot you can see the weight. So they fill the hole with heavy drilling mud and have a Float Shoe on bottom of string to not allow mud into the string. Next joint has a float collar. Each has a set of motion actuated valves in it. So if the valves do fail (which is unlikely) the readings will mimick completion of cement job. It all gets very technical.

Just know that with equipment & testing failures there was some very bad decision making on how to handle the situations. Remember BP is responsible as the lease owner but may not be at fault. There is a difference. Who made these poor decisions ? I don't know and don't think the public will ever know.

It was 1-big fuckup. Also knowing BP was over budget on that well and behind schedule I can imagine BP giving orders to save time/money. However it was Halliburtons cement job that failed and it was Transoceans BOP. So who knows?
11-18-2012, 05:00 AM #26
Tacolover II Member
Posts:427 Threads:59 Joined:Feb 2011
Sorry for the typos and hard to follow explanations to the best of my ability. I had a extensive dental procedure/surgery and still in pain and under influence of pain medication. gaah.gif

I'm not quite right...chuckle.gif



Home 




 



DISCLAIMER / Terms of Service (TOS):
Kritterbox.com - Socialize anonymously, commentary, discussion, oddities, technology, music and more!  This website is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied. kritterbox.com shall not be liable for any damages whatsoever, including, without limitation, those resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether or not advised of the possibility of damage, and on any theory of liability, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of this site or other documents which are referenced by or linked to this site.
This website exists solely for the purposes of exchange of information, communication and general entertainment. Opinions from posters are in no way endorsed by kritterbox.com. All posts on this website are the opinion of the authors and are not to be taken as statements of fact on behalf of kritterbox.com. This site may contain coarse language or other material that kritterbox.com is in no way responsible for. Material deemed to be offensive or pornographic at the discretion of kritterbox.com shall be removed. kritterbox.com reserves the right to modify, or remove posts and user accounts on this website at our discretion. kritterbox.com disclaims all liability for damages incurred directly or indirectly as a result of any material on this website. Fictitious posts and any similarity to any person living or dead is coincidental.
All users shall limit the insertion of any and all copyrighted material to portions of the article that are relevant to the point being made, with no more than 50%, and preferably less of the original source material. A link shall be visible in text format, embedded directly to the original source material without exception.
No third party links, i.e. blogs or forums will be accepted under any circumstances, and will be edited by staff in order to reflect the original source of copyrighted material, or be removed at the sole discretion of kritterbox.com.
Fair Use Notice:
This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Users may make such material available in an effort to advance awareness and understanding of issues relating to economics, individual rights, international affairs, liberty, science, and technology. This constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C.Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for educational and/or research purposes.
This Disclaimer is subject to change at any time at our discretion.
Copyright © 2011 - 2017 kritterbox.com