Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - Louisiana Oil Rig Fire / Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill

roachboy · 07-14-2010, 12:46 PM

ace...as usual you miss the point. you are again arguing the same point you always find yourself having to argue, which is that the explosion was an accident as if there is an argument about that. you seem to have some kind of Problem dealing with the fact that the regulatory system and industry standards---not to speak of practices---are all inadequate. THAT'S THE POINT OF THE ARTICLE, ACE. that's been one of the main points throughout the thread as well. and this from all political sides. the only viewpoint arguing against this, really, is you. and the infotainment you cherry pick that allows you to once again repeat the obvious.

the problem is not the explosion--it's the obvious lack of preparedness for a possible problem that was enabled by the regulatory apparatus, by industry, by the cozy relations between the two, all of which was enabled by neo-liberal delirium concerning the rationality of market relations. these problems were obvious after the valdez disaster. outlining them was the central point of the report. it was ignored by people who imagined profits more important than anything else---people like you, ace.

and now you in particular still can't deal with the reality of the situation so you shuck and jive...meanwhile, out there in the world, you're in alignment with haley barbour. fine company you keep.

meanwhile, as the oil keeps blasting unchecked from the leak area...

Quote:

U.S. officials called for halting 'integrity test' of BP oil well

By Joel Achenbach
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, July 14, 2010; 3:27 PM

So is it go or no go? Shut down the gulf oil well, or let it keep gushing?

Government officials were conferring Wednesday with BP executives and engineers about whether, and how, to proceed with the all-important "integrity test" that could temporarily shut down the well and could potentially throttle the flow permanently.

BP had planned to close valves and vents on the well's new cap Tuesday, clamping the flow entirely, and allowing engineers to observe what happens to pressures in the well. The government, however, called time out.

Energy Secretary Steven Chu and U.S. Geological Survey Director Marcia McNutt are among the government scientists in Houston trying to get more information from BP before the oil company proceeds. There has been persistent concern during the gulf crisis that the well bore is damaged. The pressure test could create leaks in the well's casing below the gulf floor, sending oil and gas into the rock formation or up through the mud into the gulf.

But the test also could bring a high reward: If the well can handle the high pressures, BP could leave the well "shut in" and it would not further pollute the gulf.

"Our basic position was, if you can give us the answers we need . . . then go ahead," an administration official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the discussions with BP, told the Associated Press. Until then, "they can't go forward."

With the test possibly imminent, BP paused in its effort to drill the first relief well, which is only four feet away, laterally, from the so-called Macondo well that blew out April 20 and caused an explosion on the rig Deepwater Horizon, killing 11 workers on the drill deck. The decision to halt work on the relief well was precautionary, because the pressure test could potentially cause hydrocarbons to flow into the new hole, BP Senior Vice President Kent Wells said Wednesday.

Work on the relief well will resume when the test is over, he said. The drilling of a second relief well had already been stopped, pending results of the first relief well.

Wells gave only a broad explanation for the test delay, saying that scientists wanted to review the operation further to ensure that it produced unambiguous results and would "minimize risk." Pressed for details on the perceived risks, Wells said that it's one thing if the pressures are relieved deep in the well -- oil and gas escaping into the rock formation far below the gulf floor, in other words -- but "it's a more difficult situation" if the hydrocarbons escape higher up.

Chu played a key role in putting an end to the "top kill" procedure in late May because of the possibility that pressurized mud could cause a lateral blowout in the well below the gulf floor. A persistent concern for months has been that damage to the well could create additional leaks, greatly complicating efforts to kill the well.

The decision to delay the test was made by federal authorities and BP officials Tuesday afternoon, Wells said. But the delay was not announced until retired Coast Guard Adm. Thad W. Allen, the national incident commander, and BP put out news releases late Tuesday -- continuing a pattern in which officials have waited many hours to inform the public of what is happening in the gulf. In late May, for example, officials waited almost a day to reveal that they had suspended the top-kill effort, and the news media continued to report, inaccurately, that mud was being pumped into the well.

As a result of discussions among government scientists and BP officials, Allen said in the Tuesday night news release, "we decided that the process may benefit from additional analysis that will be performed tonight and tomorrow."

The best-case scenario for the test would be that it halts the spewing of the well. But the well could fail the test -- and the gusher would return.

Federal authorities and BP engineers wanted to see the test create a steady increase in well pressure. This would suggest that the Macondo well is intact, and that oil and gas are not leaking into the surrounding mud and rock formations below the gulf floor.

If the pressure readings were too low, BP's technicians would abandon the test and, using robotic submersibles, reopen the valves.

The test would take at least two days. If authorities determine that the well can remain closed -- "shut in," to use the oil industry terminology -- then Macondo would no longer pollute the gulf, and ships would stop collecting or burning oil and gas.

Before work was temporarily halted, the relief well was getting close. It's four feet laterally from Macondo, with about 150 feet more to drill vertically until the interception. But the target is narrow -- a steel casing slightly less than 10 inches wide, with a seven-inch pipe inside. The final stages are painstaking, and BP and the government still say the "bottom kill" is not likely to take place until August.

The new "3 ram capping stack" was lowered without a hitch onto the reconfigured blowout preventer Monday night. A new surface ship, the Helix Producer, was also connected to the well via the "kill line" on the blowout preventer, and by Tuesday morning was siphoning about 12,000 barrels (504,000 gallons) of oil a day, Wells said. About 8,000 barrels (336,000 gallons) a day have been siphoned and burned through the surface rig Q4000.

Those containment efforts will be halted if the integrity test goes forward, Wells said.

The possibility of shutting in the well from the top was raised by BP in the past few weeks. The oil company has expressed concern many times about trying to seal the well from the top, citing fears about the condition of the well below the gulf floor. During the top kill attempt in May, the well was taking as much mud as engineers were pumping into it. It was not clear whether the mud was leaking into the rock formations or shooting out the cracks and openings in the pipe above the blowout preventer. In a recent interview with The Washington Post, Wells said BP had become increasingly confident that the mud had flowed out the top. He did not elaborate.

During a conference call Monday, BP Chief Operating Officer Doug Suttles was asked why the new sealing cap and the shut-in strategy had not been attempted earlier. He defended the company's strategy, saying that certain steps could be taken only after engineers had gathered information about the well. A major concern all along was to avoid anything to make the situation worse, he said.

"The problem is, I've had to take these steps to learn the things I've learned," he said. "Without taking those steps, it's unlikely that I would have known what I know now."

washingtonpost.com

but it was just an accident and accidents happen.