Learning (the right lessons, hopefully) from the Gulf of Mexico disaster. Also, a transcript of an radio call in of an eyewitness account (provided by geologist Jimmy Haigh) follows this article.
Guest post by Paul Driessen

Transocean’s semi-submersible drilling vessel Deepwater Horizon was finishing work on a wellbore that had found oil 18,000 feet beneath the seafloor, in mile-deep water fifty miles off the Louisiana coast. Supervisors in the control cabin overlooking the drilling operations area were directing routine procedures to cement, plug and seal the borehole, replace heavy drilling fluids with seawater and extract the drill stem and bit through the riser (outer containment pipe) that connected the vessel to the blowout preventer (BOP) on the seafloor.
Suddenly, a thump and hiss were followed by a towering eruption of seawater, drilling mud, cement, oil and natural gas. The BOP and backup systems had failed to work as designed, to control the massive amounts of unexpectedly high-pressure gas that were roaring up 23,000 feet of wellbore and riser.
Gas enveloped the area and ignited, engulfing the Horizon in a 500-foot high inferno that instantly killed eleven workers. Surviving crewmen abandoned ship in covered lifeboats or jumped 80 feet to the water.
The supply boat Tidewater Damon Bankston rushed to the scene and helped crewmen get their burned and injured colleagues aboard. Shore-based Coast Guard helicopters tore through the night sky to brave the flames and take critically injured men to hospitals.
Thirty-six hours later, the Deepwater Horizon capsized and sank, buckling the 21-inch diameter riser and breaking it off at the rig deck. Three leaks began spewing some 5,000 barrels (210,000 gallons) of crude oil per day into the ocean. As the oil gathered on the surface and drifted toward shore, it threatened a major ecological disaster for estuaries, marine life and all who depend on them for their livelihoods.
Thankfully, after getting rough for a couple days, the seas calmed. Industry, Coast Guard, NOAA and Minerals Management Service (MMS) crews and volunteer from Louisiana to Alaska had some time to recalculate the spill’s trajectory, deploy oil skimmer boats and miles of containment booms, and burn some of the oil off the sea surface. They lowered ROVs (remotely operated vehicles) to cap the end of the riser and spray chemicals that break down and disperse the oil.
Aircraft sprayed more dispersants over floating oil, and technicians hurried to build and deploy heavy cofferdams specially designed to sit atop the broken riser and BOP stack, collect the leaking oil and pipe it up to tanker barges. Drill ships are heading to the scene, to drill relief wells, intersect the original hole, cement it shut and permanently stop the leak. ExxonMobil, Shell, ConocoPhillips and many other companies have offered BP, Transocean and Halliburton assistance on all these fronts.
How bad will the disaster be? Much depends on how long the calm weather lasts, how quickly the cofferdams can be installed, and how successful the entire effort is. There is some cause for optimism – and much need for prayer, crossed fingers and hard work.
But it will take weeks to years of uncontrolled leakage, before this spill comes close to previous highs, such as the:
* Santa Barbara Channel oil platform blowout (1969): 90,000 barrels off the California coast;
* Mega Borg tanker (1990): 121,400 barrels in the Gulf of Mexico off Galveston, TX;
* Exxon Valdez tanker (1989): 250,000 barrels along 1,300 miles of untouched Alaska shoreline;
* Ixtoc 1 oil platform blowout (1979): 3,500,000 barrels in Mexico’s Campeche Bay;
* Saddam Hussein oil field sabotage (1991): 857,000,000 barrels in Kuwait;
* Natural seeps in US waters: 1,119,000 barrels every year from natural cracks in the seafloor.
Cold water and climate meant Alaska’s Prince William Sound recovery was slow; Campeche beaches and coastal waters largely rebounded much more rapidly. Mississippi River flows through the warm Delta region may help keep some oil from pushing too far into the estuaries and speed recovery of oyster, shrimp and fishing areas, as it did with spills during pre-1960 drilling. Prayers and crossed fingers again.
Should we stop drilling offshore? We can hardly afford to. We still need to drill, so that we can drive, fly, farm, heat our homes, operate factories and do everything else that requires reliable, affordable petroleum. Indeed, over 62% of all US energy still comes from oil and gas. And we certainly need the jobs and revenues that US offshore energy development generates.
We’ve already banned drilling in ANWR, off the Florida, Atlantic and Pacific coasts, and in many other areas. We’ve made it nearly impossible to mine coal or uranium, or build new coal-fired power plants or nuclear reactors. We’ve largely forced companies to drill in deep Gulf waters, where risks and costs are far higher, and the ability to respond quickly and effectively to accidents is lower.
We’ve also forced companies to take drilling risks to foreign nations – and then increased the risks of tanker accidents that cause far greater spillage when they bring that oil to America. Meanwhile, Russia, China and Cuba are preparing to drill near the same Gulf and Caribbean waters that we’ve made off limits – employing their training, technologies, regulations and ecological philosophies.
Even with this blowout and its 1969 Santa Barbara predecessor, America’s offshore record is excellent. Since 1969, we have drilled over 1,224,00 wells in state waters and on the Outer Continental Shelf. There have been 13 losses of well control involving more than 50 barrels: five were less than 100 barrels apiece; one was a little over 1,000 barrels; two (both in 1970) involved 30,000 barrels or more. Only in Santa Barbara (so far) did significant amounts of oil reach shore and cause serious environmental damage.
Globally, tankers have spilled four times more oil than drilling and production operations, often in much bigger mishaps, often in fragile areas – and chronic discharges from cars and boats dwarf tanker spills by a factor of eight. (All spill data are from the MMS and National Research Council.)
What should we do next? Recognize that life, technology and civilization involve risks. Humans make mistakes. Equipment fails. Nature presents us with extreme, unprecedented, unexpected power and fury.
Learn the right lessons from this tragic, catastrophic, probably preventable accident. Avoid grandstanding and kneejerk reactions. Replace people’s lost income. Insist on responsible, adult thinking – and a thorough, expert, non-politicized investigation. Find solutions instead of assigning blame.
Why did the BOP and backups fail? What went wrong with the cement, plugs and pressure detection devices, supervisor and crew monitoring and reactions, to set off the catastrophic chain of events? How can we improve the technology and training, to make sure such a disaster never happens again? Did the regulators fail, too? How can we improve oil spill cleanup technologies and rapid response?
Ask what realistic alternatives we have. Not “Sim USA” and virtual energy. Real energy.
Can we afford to shut down our domestic oil and gas industry – economically, ecologically and ethically – and import more, as we export risks to other countries, and shift risks from drilling accidents to tanker accidents? Can we afford to replace dozens of offshore rigs with thousands of towering offshore wind turbines, creating obstacle courses for ships laden with bunker fuel or crude oil?
Drilling in deep waters far from shore is a complex, difficult, dangerous business. Let us remember and pray for the eleven who died, those who were burned and injured, and their families and loved ones. Let us also pray for all who daily risk life and limb, to bring us the energy that makes our lives, jobs and living standards possible – and for all whose lives have been affected by the spill.
[To learn more about offshore drilling and production and this accident, visit the NOAA emergency response page, Open Choke Deepwater Horizon spill page, and Drilling Ahead oil professionals network.]
Paul Driessen is senior policy advisor for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow.
================================
ADDENDUM: This is a radio transcript done by Jimmy Haigh, of a caller to the Mark Levin Radio Show, who was an eyewitness. Levin independently corroborated the identity of the caller (off-air) and thus this represents an eyewitness account.
Here is the URL of the radio interview:
http://www.marklevinshow.com/Article.asp?id=1790422&spid=32364
================================
TRANSCRIPT:
ML: James, Dallas, Texas. WBAP – go right ahead.
James: I just wanted to clear up a few things with the Petroleum Engineer. Everything he said was correct, I was actually on the rig when it exploded, I was at work, we just…
ML: Slow down, hold on a moment, so, you were working on this rig, when it exploded?
James: Yes Sir.
ML: Okay, go ahead.
James: We had set the bottom cement plug for the inner casing string which was a production liner for the well and had set what’s called a seal assembly in the top of the well. At that point the BOP stack you’ve been talking about, the Blow Out Preventor, was tested. Ah, don’t know the results of that tes, whatever, it must have passed because at that point they elected to displace the riser, the marine riser, from the vessel to the sea floor they displaced all the mud out of the riser preparing to unlatch from the well two days later so they displace it with sea water. Ah, when they concluded the tests to the BOP stack and the inner liner they concluded everything was good..
ML: Okay, let me slow you down, let me slow you down. So they do all these tests to makesure that the infrastructure can handle what’s about to happen?
James: Correct. We’re testing the negative pressure and positive pressure of the well, the casing and the actual marine riser.
ML: Okay. I’m with you. Go ahead.
James: So after the conclusion of the test they simply opened the BOP stack back up.…
ML: And the test, as best as you know, was sufficient?
James: It should have been, yes Sir, they would have never opened it back up.
ML: Okay. Next step? Go ahead.
James: Next step they opened the annular, ah, the upper part of the BOP stack…
ML: Which has as its purpose? Why do you do that?
James: So that you can gain access back to the wellbore. You close the stack, that’s basically a humungous hydraulic valve that is closing off everything from below and above. It’s like a gate valve on the sea floor. That’s a very simplistic way of explaining a BOP, it’s a very complicated piece of equipment.
ML: Basically it’s a plug. Go ahead.
James: Correct. Basically Once they opened that plug to go ahead and start cementing the top of the well, the well bore, they cement the top and then we would pull off, another rig would slot over and do the rest of the completion work. When they opened the well is when the gas, the well kicked and we took a humungous gas bubble kick up through the wellbore. It literally pushed the seawater all the way to the crown of the rig which is about 240 feet in the air.
ML: Okay. So gas got into it and blew the top off. Now, don’t hang up. I want to continue with you because I want to ask you some questions for later OK? Including, including, has this sort of thing ever happened before? And why you think it may have happened. OK?
I’m back with “James”. That’s not his real name, Dallas WBAP. I’m not going to give the working title of what you did there either but I wanted to finish. So, the gentleman was right about the point that, obviously, some gas got into the – I’ll call it the funnel, OK?
James: Correct. And that’s not uncommon, Mark. Any time you’re drilling an oil well there’s a constant battle between what the mud weight, the drilling fluid that we use to maintain pressure on the wellbore itself, there’s a balance of the well pushing gas the one way and you’re pushing mud the other way. There’s a delicate balance has to be maintained at all times for keeping the gas from coming back in, in these what we call ‘kicks’, ah, we always get gas back in the mud, ah, but the goal of the whole situation is to try to control the kick and not allow the pressure differential between the vessel and the wellbore.
ML: But in this case obviously too much gas got in.
James: Correct. This well had not a bad history of producing lots of gas, ah, it was touch and go, you know, a few times, but it’s not terribly uncommon. You’re almost always going to get gas back from a well. We have systems to deal with the gas.
ML: So what may have happened here?
James: Well the volume, the sheer volume and pressure of gas that hit all at once was more than the safety, the controls we had in place could handle.
ML: And that’s not, I mean, is that like a mistake on somebody’s part? Or maybe it’s just Mother Nature every now and then kicks up or what?
James: Mother Nature every now and then kicks up and the pressures that we’re dealing with out there within the .., drilling deeper and deeper, you know, in deeper water, deeper overall volume, of the hole depth itself , you you’re dealing with 30 to 40 thousand pounds per square inch range. They’re serious pressures.
ML: By the way, we just verified – not to offend you – we just verified that you are who you are, which I’m sure that you already knew. I would like to hold you over to the next hour because I want to ask a few more questions about this as well as what exactly happened just after the explosion. Can you wait with us?
James: Sure. I don’t know how much of that I can share but I’ll do my best.
ML: All right, I don’t want to get you in trouble, so to the extent you can – fine, to the extent you can’t, we understand.
ML: 877388 381. We’re talking to a caller who, under an assumed name, who was on the rig when it blew up. We were talking about how it happened And now, James, I want to take you to the point when it happened. What exactly happened? … You were standing where?
James: Ah, well, obviously the gas blew the seawater out of the riser. Once it displaced all the seawater out the gas began to spill out on the deck up through the centre of the rig floor . The rig, you have to imagine a rectangle about 400 feet by 300 feet, with the derrick, the rig floor, set directly in the centre. Ah, as this gas is now heavier than air it starts to settle into different places, ah, from that point something ignited the gas which would have caused the first major explosion.
ML: Now what might ignite the gas?
James: Any number of things, Mark, ah, all rig floor equipment is what they consider intrinsically safe meaning it can not create a spark, that these type of accidents can not occur. However with as much gas that came out as fast as it did it would have spilled over the entire rig fairly rapidly within a minute of, I would think the entire rig would be enveloped in gas, a lot of this stuff, you can’t smell it, you can’t taste it, ah it’s just there., and it’s heavier than oxygen. As it settled in, ah, it could have made it to a space that wasn’t intrinsically safe. Something as simple as static electricity could have ignited the first explosion which set off of course a series of explosions.
ML: Right, so, so, so what happened? You’re standing where? You’re sitting somewhere? What happened?
James: Well, I was in a location that was a pretty good way from the initial blast. Ah, wasn’t affected by the blast, I was able to make it out and get up forward where the lifeboats, the PA system was still working, ah, there was an announcement overhead to, ah, that this was not a drill. Obviously we have fire drills every single week to prepare for emergencies like this, fire and abandonment drills, and over the intercom came the order to report to the lifeboats 1 and 2, that this was not a drill, that there is a fire, and, ah, we proceeded that way.
ML: So, the 11 men who died. Were they friends of yours?
James: Yes Sir, they were.
ML: Did they die instantly?
James: Ah, I would have to assume so, yes Sir. I would think they were directly inside the bomb when it went off.
ML: How did you get off there?
James: The bomb – the gas being the bomb.
ML: OK, so the bomb being the gas explosion.
James: Correct. Correct. They would have been in the belly of the beast.
ML: Let me ask, and we have to be careful of what we say, people will run wild with ideas. I just want to make sure.
James: Sure…
ML: Let me ask you this. Why would the government send in a SWOT team? What’s that all about?
James: Believe it or not, that’s… funny you should mention that, Transocean maintains a SWOT team, ah, the drilling company, that, their sole purpose, they’re experts in their field, the BOP, the Blow Out Preventer, ah, they call that sub-sea equipment, they have their own SWOT team that they send out to the rigs to service and maintain that equipment …
ML: I’m talking about a … What are interior SWOT teams? What does that mean?
James: The interior? From the government? Now, I don’t have any idea. That’s beyond me. And the other gentleman also mentioned the USGS that comes out and does the surveys, I’ve been on that particular rig, ah, for 3 years, offshore for 5 years, and I’ve seen the USGS one time. What we do have, on a very regular basis, is the MMS, which is the Minerals Management Service…
ML: They’re all under the interior department..
James: OK. Ah, as a matter of fact, we were commended, for our inspection record from the MMS, we actually received an award from them for the highest level of safety and environmental awareness.
ML: Well, I thought you were going to receive that award. Did they put it on hold?
James: No, we have actually received that award, we received it last year, we may have been ready to receive it again this year.
ML: Let me ask you this. You say lifeboats. So how did you get on this lifeboat? Where are these lifeboats?
James: Ah, there’s actually 4 lifeboats, 2 forward and 2 aft, ah, depending on where the emergency actually takes place.
ML: I mean, did you actually end up jumping in the water to get on to the lifeboat? Sometimes you have to do that?
James: Ah, I’ll just say that there were 5 to 7 individuals that jumped and the rest went down in lifeboats.
ML: All right. I won’t ask because you don’t want to identify yourself that clearly, good point. How fast…were rescue efforts. How fast did they reach you?
James: Ah, well it was, ah, it’s common to have a very large workboat standing by, bringing tools out, bringing groceries, bringing supplies, it’s a constant turnaround, so we actually had a very large vessel real close by, he was actually alongside with a hose attached taking mud off of our vessel on to his own, and then had to disconnect – in the emergency he disconnected and pulled out about a mile to standby for rescue efforts. So it was, it was fairly quick.
ML: How quick until the coastguard arrived?
James: Mark, it’s hard to say. Between 45 minutes to maybe an hour, when I recall seeing the first helicopter.
ML: Which was actually pretty fast because you are 130 miles offshore, right?
James: Correct. We are.. if you look at the nearest bit of land, which would be Grand Isle, Loiusiana, somewhere in that area, we were only about maybe 50 miles as the crow flies, from civilization, such as New Orleans, it would be 200 miles. A flight by helicopter was more than likely 80 to 100 miles away.
ML: You’re going to be beset by lawyers, with the government, ah, others looking for an opportunity to make money, it’s going to get very very ugly, and ah, officials are going with no background and experience, ah, climate change and so forth, to what extent is that gonna help out?
James: Yeah, that’s, to me, this seems all knee jerk, ah, the number one focus right now is to be containment, I like the idea of the boom they’re going to try to lower into the water to capture the leak, ah…
ML: How long might that take? I’ve been reading about this boom, it could take 30 days.
James: It very well could, you got to remember the challenging environment they’re in there, it’s 5000 feet deep, there’s a tangled wreck of a rig with all that marine riser still connected and twisted up into a big wad down there and its going to take some time to get all that stuff in place. The engineering has to be there, you obviously don’t want to rush into it, you want to move expediently but, ah, you’re risking the lives of those men that are going to go out there and try to attempt this.
ML: I was just going to say that. That’s very dangerous. Extremely dangerous.
James: Absolutely. Absolutely. There’s gonna be oil. There’s gonna be natural gas, all the same things that caused us to explode are still present, they’re there. The pressure has been cut off dramatically from the simple fact of the folding of the riser, it has, basically, took a pretty good guard hose and kinked it over several times.
ML: How old is this rig? How long has it been..
James: It was put in service in 2001. It’s a fairly new rig.
ML: And, ah, what is the sense of shutting down every rig in the Gulf of Mexico in response to this?
James: Absolutely no sense whatsoever. It was a… literally could very well be a once in a lifetime freak accident, or it could be negligence, that’s for other people to figure out but… From my position, it just seems like, every now and then, you can’t win against Mother Nature. It’s her fault that you’re not prepared for.
ML: But to shut down every rig, I mean, in response to this? I’m not sure why that would be ..
James: These BOP tests are literally mandated from the Mineral Management Service and they’re conducted like clockwork. I mean, if one of those tests ever failed they would immediately stop the operation, seal the well up up, pull the BOP stack back on the deck, which is 48 hours minimum, and make the necessary repairs or replacement parts and then go back down, reconnect, retest, and keep testing until it passes or keep repairing it until it passes.
ML: So this was , ah, let me, this must have been incredibly harrowing for you to experience something like this.
James: Ah, that’s putting it mildly. Very mildly.
ML: Anything else you want to tell me?
James: No I just. I got in the truck to make a short trip and, ah, I heard the gentleman say something about possible terrorism, I just wanted to put all that to bed now, ah, I understand your audience, you have a large audience, I appreciate your point of view, I try to listen to you as much as I can, it’s just,.. terrorism and all that needs to leave everyone’s minds, and let’s focus on the 11 men that are dead and the survivors, that’s what needs…, that’s where the focus for this country needs to be right now.
ML: All right my friend, well, look, we wish you all the best, and I tell you, it’s really God’s blessing that you survived.
James: Yes Sir, I completely agree.
ML: All right James, well thank you very much for calling. We appreciate it.
James: Thank you Mark.
ML: God bless.
Learning (the right lessons, hopefully) from the Gulf of Mexico disaster
Paul Driessen
Transocean’s semi-submersible drilling vessel Deepwater Horizon was finishing work on a wellbore that had found oil 18,000 feet beneath the seafloor, in mile-deep water fifty miles off the Louisiana coast. Supervisors in the control cabin overlooking the drilling operations area were directing routine procedures to cement, plug and seal the borehole, replace heavy drilling fluids with seawater and extract the drill stem and bit through the riser (outer containment pipe) that connected the vessel to the blowout preventer (BOP) on the seafloor.
Suddenly, a thump and hiss were followed by a towering eruption of seawater, drilling mud, cement, oil and natural gas. The BOP and backup systems had failed to work as designed, to control the massive amounts of unexpectedly high-pressure gas that were roaring up 23,000 feet of wellbore and riser.
Gas enveloped the area and ignited, engulfing the Horizon in a 500-foot high inferno that instantly killed eleven workers. Surviving crewmen abandoned ship in covered lifeboats or jumped 80 feet to the water.
The supply boat Tidewater Damon Bankston rushed to the scene and helped crewmen get their burned and injured colleagues aboard. Shore-based Coast Guard helicopters tore through the night sky to brave the flames and take critically injured men to hospitals.
Thirty-six hours later, the Deepwater Horizon capsized and sank, buckling the 21-inch diameter riser and breaking it off at the rig deck. Three leaks began spewing some 5,000 barrels (210,000 gallons) of crude oil per day into the ocean. As the oil gathered on the surface and drifted toward shore, it threatened a major ecological disaster for estuaries, marine life and all who depend on them for their livelihoods.
Thankfully, after getting rough for a couple days, the seas calmed. Industry, Coast Guard, NOAA and Minerals Management Service (MMS) crews and volunteer from Louisiana to Alaska had some time to recalculate the spill’s trajectory, deploy oil skimmer boats and miles of containment booms, and burn some of the oil off the sea surface. They lowered ROVs (remotely operated vehicles) to cap the end of the riser and spray chemicals that break down and disperse the oil.
Aircraft sprayed more dispersants over floating oil, and technicians hurried to build and deploy heavy cofferdams specially designed to sit atop the broken riser and BOP stack, collect the leaking oil and pipe it up to tanker barges. Drill ships are heading to the scene, to drill relief wells, intersect the original hole, cement it shut and permanently stop the leak. ExxonMobil, Shell, ConocoPhillips and many other companies have offered BP, Transocean and Halliburton assistance on all these fronts.
How bad will the disaster be? Much depends on how long the calm weather lasts, how quickly the cofferdams can be installed, and how successful the entire effort is. There is some cause for optimism – and much need for prayer, crossed fingers and hard work.
But it will take weeks to years of uncontrolled leakage, before this spill comes close to previous highs, such as the:
* Santa Barbara Channel oil platform blowout (1969): 90,000 barrels off the California coast;
* Mega Borg tanker (1990): 121,400 barrels in the Gulf of Mexico off Galveston, TX;
* Exxon Valdez tanker (1989): 250,000 barrels along 1,300 miles of untouched Alaska shoreline;
* Ixtoc 1 oil platform blowout (1979): 3,500,000 barrels in Mexico’s Campeche Bay;
* Saddam Hussein oil field sabotage (1991): 857,000,000 barrels in Kuwait;
* Natural seeps in US waters: 1,119,000 barrels every year from natural cracks in the seafloor.
Cold water and climate meant Alaska’s Prince William Sound recovery was slow; Campeche beaches and coastal waters largely rebounded much more rapidly. Mississippi River flows through the warm Delta region may help keep some oil from pushing too far into the estuaries and speed recovery of oyster, shrimp and fishing areas, as it did with spills during pre-1960 drilling. Prayers and crossed fingers again.
Should we stop drilling offshore? We can hardly afford to. We still need to drill, so that we can drive, fly, farm, heat our homes, operate factories and do everything else that requires reliable, affordable petroleum. Indeed, over 62% of all US energy still comes from oil and gas. And we certainly need the jobs and revenues that US offshore energy development generates.
We’ve already banned drilling in ANWR, off the Florida, Atlantic and Pacific coasts, and in many other areas. We’ve made it nearly impossible to mine coal or uranium, or build new coal-fired power plants or nuclear reactors. We’ve largely forced companies to drill in deep Gulf waters, where risks and costs are far higher, and the ability to respond quickly and effectively to accidents is lower.
We’ve also forced companies to take drilling risks to foreign nations – and then increased the risks of tanker accidents that cause far greater spillage when they bring that oil to America. Meanwhile, Russia, China and Cuba are preparing to drill near the same Gulf and Caribbean waters that we’ve made off limits – employing their training, technologies, regulations and ecological philosophies.
Even with this blowout and its 1969 Santa Barbara predecessor, America’s offshore record is excellent. Since 1969, we have drilled over 50,000 wells in state waters and on the Outer Continental Shelf. There have been 13 losses of well control involving more than 50 barrels: five were less than 100 barrels apiece; one was a little over 1,000 barrels; two (both in 1970) involved 30,000 barrels or more. Only in Santa Barbara (so far) did significant amounts of oil reach shore and cause serious environmental damage.
Globally, tankers have spilled four times more oil than drilling and production operations, often in much bigger mishaps, often in fragile areas – and chronic discharges from cars and boats dwarf tanker spills by a factor of eight. (All spill data are from the MMS and National Research Council.)
What should we do next? Recognize that life, technology and civilization involve risks. Humans make mistakes. Equipment fails. Nature presents us with extreme, unprecedented, unexpected power and fury.
Learn the right lessons from this tragic, catastrophic, probably preventable accident. Avoid grandstanding and kneejerk reactions. Replace people’s lost income. Insist on responsible, adult thinking – and a thorough, expert, non-politicized investigation. Find solutions instead of assigning blame.
Why did the BOP and backups fail? What went wrong with the cement, plugs and pressure detection devices, supervisor and crew monitoring and reactions, to set off the catastrophic chain of events? How can we improve the technology and training, to make sure such a disaster never happens again? Did the regulators fail, too? How can we improve oil spill cleanup technologies and rapid response?
Ask what realistic alternatives we have. Not “Sim USA” and virtual energy. Real energy.
Can we afford to shut down our domestic oil and gas industry – economically, ecologically and ethically – and import more, as we export risks to other countries, and shift risks from drilling accidents to tanker accidents? Can we afford to replace dozens of offshore rigs with thousands of towering offshore wind turbines, creating obstacle courses for ships laden with bunker fuel or crude oil?
Drilling in deep waters far from shore is a complex, difficult, dangerous business. Let us remember and pray for the eleven who died, those who were burned and injured, and their families and loved ones. Let us also pray for all who daily risk life and limb, to bring us the energy that makes our lives, jobs and living standards possible – and for all whose lives have been affected by the spill.
[To learn more about offshore drilling and production and this accident, visit the NOAA emergency response page, Open Choke Deepwater Horizon spill page, and Drilling Ahead oil professionals network.]
Paul Driessen is senior policy advisor for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow.
E.M.Smith wrote: “So I’m sitting here thinking these guys basically drill a low temperature oil volcano, dynamically balance mud against the gas, do complex mechanical construction under a mile of water, and somehow manage to pump out oil at the end of it all? And with very very few blowouts happening?”
I’ve worked out there, and that’s very good description, one of the best I’ve seen yet.
I saw one of the survivors quoted as saying that the rule all rig workers are trained in is “whoosh, bang, run!” Whoosh is the sound of gas blowing out of the wellbore – bang is the first explosion, which always happens whenever gas gets free – and when you hear that first “bang” you had better be running if you want to live!
Will BP go bankrupt? Oh good grief, Joe, you have no idea of the scale the major internationals work on. Let’s say that this disaster ends up costing BP $1 Billion (US)
That’s not a bad estimate, because don’t forget that all of the other companies involved are going to take a share. In their last reported quarter, BP is earning a *profit* of about $1 Billion *per* *Week*.
So if we double the worst case scenario, this could end up costing BP 2 week’s profits.
I don’t think that will drive them into bankruptcy.
To jack simmons – re, the heat exchanger – somehow, the heat has to be generated downhole, pumping surface water won’t work. Reason? Don’t forget that anything pumped down has got to travel through 5,000 feet of ocean cooled tubing. BP would have to use coiled, flexible tubing off a support ship with such equipment, and I don’t believe it’s possible to insulate the flexible tubing. Therefore they’d be working against a thermal heat sink which consists of the entire ocean – impossible. It’s like pumping the fluid through a 5,000 ft long water cooled jacket and expecting it to still be warm at the end.
Generating the heat downhole can be done, but it’s not easy.
Life without a “white collar” is (and always has been) dangerous. Most of the population of the world know this first hand. How many people in government or civilian management, supervisory, administrative, and clerical jobs risk much more than a paper cut each day? Most of these experience their most dangerous moments going to and from work via public transport or in POVs. The top of the pyrimid boys and girls, the little people who make the ‘rules’ for the rest of us, have no idea what the word ‘danger’ means. The worst of them, the ‘bright idea’ folks who think they know better than anyone on the planet, no doubt will solve these minor glitches with more legislation and rules for us to live by –no doubt too, to our great expense.
There is something wrong with blaming the 2010 Gulf of Mexico blowout entirely on the equipment. There have been thousands of wells drilled offshore and hundreds in deep water all to the benefit of…. well, us! If we think we can live without hydrocarbons, or even be willing to, we should have a sober second thought. Is this an environmental disaster? Absolutely! But we must be also willing to admit that this is “collateral damage” of a modern western lifestyle.
Maybe all the safety equipment was not deployed on the Deepwater Horizon Rig. It is debateable whether an acoustic remote switch used to function the BOP stack would have saved the day and prevented this blowout. But since BP was in the process of abandoning this well, they must have a large amount of information about this reservoir, the type of pressures that they would encounter and there would have been safety factors built in.
Even before the well was spudded, there would have been a thorough geological and geophysical investigation of the area. The BP drilling department would have done a through du diligence on the area. If they didn’t, well that’s part of the human error element in this incident.
But there was no problem in this well when the reservoir was first encountered. They drilled through it to total depth, probably ran many tests design to measure pressure and fluid type in the reservoir. They would have had a full understanding of what they found: geology, fluids and pressures and they would have circled back to pre-drill models to determine what surprises they found, if any, because Mother Nature can surprise. But BP seemed to have been prepared right up until the abandonment phase began. All hell broke loose after they began displacing the riser to sea water and a gas bubble escaped.
I think everything was going well with the abandonment operation until someone messed up. There should have been simple safeguards in place and everyone from roughnecks to the drilling superintendant would have had specific tasks to perform. But complacency may have set in. After all this operation was “successful” in many minds on that rig even though the abandonment phase wasn’t completed. There may have been a distraction at a critical moment or someone may have been distrascted by his thoughts. Maybe someone decided to “speed things up” and they crew was rushing to complete the job, or disengaged critical safety equipement at exactly the wrong moment. You can’t make any industrial operation completely 100% safe since the human element may be the biggest problem you cannot fix.
wws says:
May 10, 2010 at 6:35 am
Thanks.
Keeping the pressure up in that flexible tube from being crushed would be a factor as well.
After the accident I started looking at the technology used, of which I knew little about. Now I am amazed at how complicated and technologically advanced these ventures into the ocean floor are. Best guess is that the technology needed and the associated risks are one order of magnitude less than going to space, meaning that the risks are high. It’s nothing short of incredible that these companies do it so well. For all of you that haven’s seen one here’s an image of a BOP being installed:
http://www.jamstec.go.jp/chikyu/jp/Expedition/NantroSEIZE/Images/exp319-079.jpg
An incredibly complex piece of equipment that has to perform flawlessly a mile below the ocean surface….
Most environmentalist don’t have a clue…. or it would become readily obvious to them that it would be much easier and less risky to drill on land in places like ANWR, and yes, WE have to DRILL.
Jose
wws:
“Generating the heat downhole can be done, but it’s not easy.”
I’m wondering why resistance wire couldn’t be used. Heating with electricity would bypass the problem of pumping heat through a mile of cold ocean water.
And Jose Suro, you hit the nail on the head. The blame for this disaster must be laid at the feet of the eco-bedwetters, who continue to insist that there can be no drilling in ANWR, where there are at least ten billion barrels of easily recoverable oil for the taking, under only three square miles of Arctic wasteland.
So energy companies, which must produce oil to stay in business, have been forced to drill in extreme ocean depths instead. The blame for this disaster is largely the fault of Greenpeace, the WWF and similar organizations that caused this situation to occur.
I believe that the steam cleaning of the beaches after the Exxon Valdez accident harmed more species than the actual oil spill.
The argument for more offshore drilling:
1. Dependence on foreign oil is bad because it makes supply vulnerable.
2. Domestic production is declining as oil wells on land are depleted.
3. Most U.S. reserves are under seas, so offshore drilling is the only way to stem the decline in domestic production.
4. By adding to supply, additional offshore wells will limit future price increases and lessen our vulnerable to interruptions in the availability of foreign oil.
The argument against more offshore drilling:
1. Additional drilling at sea increases the risk of disasters from oil spills.
2. More drilling would have little effect on oil prices, since U.S. offshore wells account for only a small percentage(3% ?) of world oil production.
3. Augmenting domestic supply with more offshore production enables continued dependence on oil rather than encouraging the more efficient use of this depleting resource and the development of alternative energy sources.
4. On balance, the benefit of more offshore drilling is not worth the risk to the environment and the economies of coastal areas.
I wonder why they wouldn’t try a big electrical centrifugal pump powered from the barge on the surface to chop up the gas hydrates and lift the column of oil 5000 up to the barge/tanker?
During WW2, Nazi subs sank 11 tankers in the Gulf of Mexico with cargoes of nearly 900,000 barrels. The tanker Virginia, with 180,000 barrels aboard, was sunk right in the mouth of the Mississippi, far closer to shore then the BP rig. We survived that and we will survive this.
Details here: http://islandturtle.blogspot.com/2010/05/bp-oil-spill-is-not-our-worst-offshore.html
“One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.”
~Plato
…And those, being inferior, faithfully obey and follow secret orders from hidden patrons.
So if the solution or remedy is not 100% perfect, then do NOTHING?
That is why they work for the government. It was the same when a tsunami hit India. They were scared to death the food, recovery efforts would be delivered by religious people so it was better to say no and let people die than risk a bible hidden in a supplies pallet.
It did…
This case is an argument for developing oil sands.
The underground coal mining accident was an argument for mountain top removal,
@Wren says:
May 10, 2010 at 8:12 am
That’s like arguing that you shouldn’t grow corn in Indiana because Indiana-grown corn makes up only 3% of the world’s corn supply and chemical fertilizers can be hazardous.
From link furnished by Smokey
Two Dutch companies are on stand-by to help the Americans tackle an oil slick in the Gulf of Mexico. The two companies use huge booms to sweep and suck the oil from the surface of the sea. The US authorities, however, have difficulties with the method they use.
What do the Dutch have that the Americans don’t when it comes to tackling oil spills at sea? “Skimmers,” answers Wierd Koops, chairman of the Dutch organisation for combating oil spills, Spill Response Group Holland.
Now the restaurants in NOLA use methods to skim fat/oil from the top of broth but the old fashioned lawyers are not into techology enough to wrap their heads around that method.
@ur momisugly Wren says:
It’s been a while since I last checked, but don’t ever remember the “technically recoverable oil” decreasing. In other words, we’re not depleting our oil wells. For whatever reason,(pick one conspiracy or another) we’re simply not pumping or drilling. Billions of barrels of oil has been found Williston Basin Province of North Dakota, Montana, and South Dakota (http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2008/3092/). ANWR has more. The USGS is a great place to find information about availability of our various resources. Dependence on foreign oil is self inflicted. With the various technologies, we don’t have to be. Equating it to the gas pump prices, is a different matter. We don’t currently have the capacity to refine the oil. We haven’t built a new refinery since the 70s. But like electricity, our other forms of energy, if we chose to, could be as cheap and plentiful as we desire. As pointed out in the article, the earth would probably significantly cleaner if we chose to do it ourselves, however, short-sighted reactionary green thinkers have convinced many Americans its better this way.
Another survivor story released this morning on NPR:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126650691
It seems odd that 3 weeks after the event, only these two first person accounts have been released to the public (that I know of). The government, BP, insurance agents and lawyers must be giving survivors about the same counsel: “Don’t talk about it.”
Most of the very reasonable questions that you post above, Mr. Driessen, will be answered in due course. But even the most pro-oil advocates may be uncomfortable with those answers if the stories of the crew aren’t released are withheld from the “findings”.
I just wonder how factual the process of fact-finding will be. WUWT is a daily stopping point for many people who believe that people have a right to know. So, in the spirit of a free press: 127 men were on board. Eleven killed. Assuming some of the other survivors wish to be heard, what are some of the remaining 114 stories?
Good article and some worthwhile comment especially about oil companies’ need to drill offshore when we have other resouces waiting on land. But I have to disagree with Smokey. The words Socialism and ‘common sense’ should not appear in the same sentence.
As usual very good comments here. Rationality is the order of the day.
Joe comment about NWS and NPS “Overhead” reminded me of my
Firefight days, when the “fire triangle”-Heat, Oxygen,Fuel was turned into the
“Fire Square” Heat, Oxygen, Fuel, and Overhead. Guaranteed for at least a
couple of Weekends of extra work…
Joe says:
May 9, 2010 at 3:01 pm
E-mail just came in to me;
DATE: May 09, 2010 16:48:51 CST
Salazar Dispatches NPS and FWS Directors to Gulf Coast Command Centers to Support Fight to Protect Coastal Communities and Wildlife
http://www.mms.gov/DeepwaterHorizon.htm
Our government doesn’t name or mention BP in the legal part of the incident. We can’t imagine that the contract between Transocean and BP didn’t require proof of insurance a coverage for liability in case of an accident.
Wind turbine condor cuisanrt issues:
“It’s hard to justify this kind of bird and bat slaughter for the amount of electricity we’re generating here,” council spokesman John Sheehan said. “Ultimately we think there are good places to put windmills and wind turbines, but we need to do some study before we start putting them up, and that wasn’t done here.”
Now we have a different bird kill. Death by tar and feathering.
In the scheme of the planet, which is worse? We know wind turbines will wipe out birds. We also know 30,000 offshore wells have not killed birds but this leak will.
So we have problems with dirty birds
One of the posts questioned why the media has nearly zero stories from survivors. The are not doing their work.
Just like the below 100 pages of wind turbine accidents/incidents. They are death by a thousand paper cuts and many deaths are reported but never 11 deaths at one time. Turbines by Mitsibushi are famous for leaking oil and contaminating soil. Some are bird killers. Some blades fail in great numbers.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/23856814/Wind-Turbine-Accidents
Do I understand this correctly. BP use a well known US company now based in Switzerland possibly for tax or other reasons to do the drilling and there’s a blow-out. BP are immediately castigated for being a Foreign Firm and clearly the cause of the problem which is essentially what Ms Palin has suggested. Reading the accounts here, it seems that this comment reinforces many people’s opinion that she rather tends to speak first then think afterwards. Now I know there’s history between BP and Palins so perhaps a more cynical person would suggest that someone is being naughty.
Of course I’m not an expert but common sense (yes that rare commondity) suggests that something has happened which transcends normal and extra normal occurences – it happens in all walks of life and that no-one can be personally responsible – which seems to be the thrust of this case. It seems to me that BP has reacted very quickly and positively in it statements and actions. Whatever they’ve tried hasn’t worked yet but we don’t hear too many comments from other experts about how they would achieve the goal.
I feel sad for those who lost lives and for the problems that oil causes to wildlife habitat and livelihood and feel that this continual sniping from some with other agendas don’t exactly help
“Grumpy Old Man says:
May 10, 2010 at 9:14 am
Good article and some worthwhile comment especially about oil companies’ need to drill offshore when we have other resou(r)ces waiting on land. But I have to disagree with Smokey. The words Socialism and ‘common sense’ should not appear in the same sentence.”
A poor citation on my part. Those words were actually mine. I stand by them, incompetence knows no political affiliation.
David Middleton says:
May 10, 2010 at 8:41 am
@Wren says:
May 10, 2010 at 8:12 am
That’s like arguing that you shouldn’t grow corn in Indiana because Indiana-grown corn makes up only 3% of the world’s corn supply and chemical fertilizers can be hazardous.
===
The argument is 3% of supply has little effect on price. It doesn’t matter if it’s oil or corn.
James Sexton says:
May 10, 2010 at 8:41 am
@ur momisugly Wren says:
It’s been a while since I last checked, but don’t ever remember the “technically recoverable oil” decreasing. In other words, we’re not depleting our oil wells. For whatever reason,(pick one conspiracy or another) we’re simply not pumping or drilling. Billions of barrels of oil has been found Williston Basin Province of North Dakota, Montana, and South Dakota (http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2008/3092/). ANWR has more. The USGS is a great place to find information about availability of our various resources. Dependence on foreign oil is self inflicted. With the various technologies, we don’t have to be. Equating it to the gas pump prices, is a different matter. We don’t currently have the capacity to refine the oil. We haven’t built a new refinery since the 70s. But like electricity, our other forms of energy, if we chose to, could be as cheap and plentiful as we desire. As pointed out in the article, the earth would probably significantly cleaner if we chose to do it ourselves, however, short-sighted reactionary green thinkers have convinced many Americans its better this way.
====
Oil is a depletable resource. The wells eventually run dry. The domestic reserves we use now will not be available for future generations of Americans. Sure, new oil is being formed, but not as fast as existing reserves are being consumed. So conservation and alternative sources of energy are important if we place value on our dependents.