Lessons from the Gulf blowout

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

click image for slideshow

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.

Lessons from the Gulf blowout

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.

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
143 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Wren
May 10, 2010 10:56 am

Correction to my previous post:
Make that descendants, not “dependents.” Not that I don’t place value on my dependents, but I hope all my descendants don’t become my dependents.

RayB
May 10, 2010 11:02 am

Jack Simmons says:
May 10, 2010 at 3:19 am
RayB says:
May 9, 2010 at 1:28 pm
Here is a crackpot idea..
How about a heat exchanger in the box? Weld in big pipes around the inner circumference and pump (warm) surface water through it at a regulated flow to control chamber temps and break down the crystals at a controlled rate. An insulating jacket around the chamber and a regulated heat exchanger would give some control of the environment inside.
Ray,
Do everyone a favor and pass this notion onto BP with this email address:
Horizonsupport@oegllc.com
Hi Jack,
Thanks for the e-mail address and positive response. I will send them my design idea.
wws says:
May 10, 2010 at 6:35 am
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.
——————
The two biggest challenges to my plan are the ocean cooling the water and the depth pressure. After considering it for a day or so, I still think that it can be overcome.
WWS brings up a good point, but again I think that we can get past it. The entire 5,000 feet of the pipe would not need to be flexible, only the final length. Using semi-rigid or rigid pipe part way up would open up avenues for insulation through the majority of the thermocline and address the depth pressure issues at the same time. There are also options of increasing flow volume and initial temperature to get more heat to the vessel, and increasing pressure to equalize against the depth.
Someone above mentioned using an electrical resistive heating unit. How about combining that with my idea and put a water heater/boiler at the the vessel to increase or decrease the amount of heat added by the exchanger, either as a booster for surface water or a stand alone undersea heat generation unit.
Still under consideration..
RJB

Wren
May 10, 2010 11:35 am

Smokey says:
May 9, 2010 at 7:45 pm
Dutch oil skimming ships are standing by to assist. But the EPA will not allow them to suck up the oil, because the excess water that is returned to the ocean has a small amount of oil still in it.
=========
That’s odd considering the EPA says skimming is one of the recovery activities(see discussion of burning in link).
http://www.epa.gov/bpspill/qanda.html
I suspect there is something missing in the story from the Dutch ships.

wws
May 10, 2010 11:55 am

“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.”
Sometimes the biggest problems are the simplest. Anything electrical is going to require a 5,000 ft long extension cord coming down from the surface, but it has to be strong enough not to pull itself in two by it’s own weight. (okay, we’re talking wireline here) But it’s also got to be able to carry HUGE amounts of current without burning up, so it’s got to be pretty thick – remember heating that high a volume of water is going to take a LOT of continuous current. And then it’s got to be able to make a perfectly watertight and electrically insulated connection under the approx 2200 psi water pressure at that depth.
One single drop of water gets into the electrical system *anywhere* along that line, and the whole system shorts out.

Doug Badgero
May 10, 2010 11:57 am

Wren
Read what we are doing v. what the Dutch want to do. Last report I saw we had skimmed about 2,000,000 gallons of which only about 10% is oil. The rest must be stored on the tanker. The dutch want to skim and return the bulk of the water to the sea. Naturally, it will contain some residual oil. The EPA will not allow this to happen – last I knew.

James F. Evans
May 10, 2010 11:59 am

It is the tremendous pressure the oil & gas are under and surprise pressure surges, analogous to a shaken can of soda pop, which present the greatest challenge to safe exploration & development of offshore oil resources.
Controlling surprise pressure surges with redundant safety features is a top priority.
In a broader view, the American National Interest requires stable, consistent, low cost energy supplies (it seems some want expensive and unreliable energy supplies as a national policy).
Oil will be part of that mix for decades to come.
Safety means being one step-ahead of potentially dangerous situations. It requires a series of “what if this happens” type questions and answers based in solid engineering know how.
Nature can always overpower Man and his machines, but that can’t stop men from engineering machines to engage and take advantage of Nature’s bounty with increasing safety and productivity.
It can be done, it just takes ‘will’ and engineering know how.
I can only hope Man will never lose his nerve and retreat into a stance of timidity and passive acceptance of limitation.

bob paglee
May 10, 2010 11:59 am

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 plus gas within the pipe 5000 up to the barge/tanker? If enough electrical power was available to run both the pump and an electrical heater for the bottom few feet of piping, could this suffice to prevent a jam of ice crystals within the pipe that might jam up and shut off the flow from the pump? Isn’t the stuff hot as it escapes from the broken riser, but not for long as it mixes with the cold water on the sea floor?

Bennett
May 10, 2010 12:01 pm

WHY did the oil rig sink ??
(– Because a small fleet of firefighting boats hosed many hundreds of tons of seawater on to the burning structure… causing it to capsize, break the drill-pipe open, and sink)
If they had merely let the rig burn… there would be no major oil spill at all.
The rig would still be afloat and the drill-pipe readily accessible for containment.
Search and rescue aboard the oil rig was obviously a pointless task soon after the explosion– the dead were dead, and the survivors had escaped.
Still it took 36 hours for zealous firefighters to capsize & sink the giant rig– directly causing the huge oil spill. Sinking the rig definitely put out the fire…they will probably all get medals.
Win-the Battle-But Lose-the-War.
Note that one of the first Federal ‘solutions’ attempted to quell the oil spill — was to ignite the oil and burn it off. That solution had already been easily available at no cost or effort — except for the “quick-thinking” firefighters.

May 10, 2010 12:12 pm

wws,
Here’s what I was thinking: I didn’t mean using electric current to heat the water. You’re right, that would take a lot of amps, and it probably wouldn’t work anyway since cold sea water would be constantly flushing out the warmed water until the vessel was in place. Instead, I was thinking that the containment vessel walls could be lined with resistance wire to keep the methane ice from forming, similar to the defrosting setup in a car’s rear window.
Also, the copper wires wouldn’t have to be that big a gauge if the voltage was high enough. A step-down transformer in the containment vessel could multiply the current.
I was just speculating. There are plenty of much more knowledgeable engineers working on the problem than me.

DCC
May 10, 2010 12:57 pm

@David44 asked “It seems like a short but huge bolus of (nature’s best friend) CO2 released from large on-board reservoir tanks and aimed at the stack might be effective in immediately snuffing a fire like this. ”
Putting out the fire doesn’t solve the problem. It would just re-ignite, for the same reason it ignited the first time. They weren’t trying to put it out, they were trying to salvage the hull.

wws
May 10, 2010 2:06 pm

Smokey, those much more experienced engineers are all coming up snake eye’s at the moment, so your ideas are as good as theirs. They apparently have a way to pump some material into the BOP from the side, which is why they are going to try a “junk shot”. They must also think the BOP valves are at least partially closed for that to work.
But I fear that is still a real low percentage play. It’s a desperation shot, which is why they are hesitant to try it.
That resistance idea built into the cap isn’t bad, although you still have the problem of maintaining a deep electrical connection. (or maybe an ROV could plug in and provide power?) I think the reason the hydrate problem is so bad is that the decompression at that point is acting as a refrigerator unit. They are now going to try a differently designed box – you can just imagine the Engineer’s arguments going on back at the office.
I’ll guarantee there’s *somebody* saying “I told you that first one would never work!!!”

bob paglee
May 10, 2010 2:07 pm

The specific gravity of the oil and hydrates is lower than that of sea water and that is why the stuff is rising to the surface, but probably very slowly. It would seem to be wishful thinking to expect this gelatinous goo to rise up into the peak of the “dome” and enter a pipe that would take it to the surface simply due to a lifting force from the “floatation” effect caused by a nominal difference in specific gravity. Are they reluctant to pump it upward because this could create a sludge-like mix of stuff and water that would take an eternity to separate into oil and water and methane that would send the methane-conscious AGW anti-carbon hysterians into orbit?

bob paglee
May 10, 2010 2:24 pm

OK, a giant centrifuge conld possibly be constructed, and eventually the sludge held for awhile in a gigantic storage pond could be seperated into ints component parts: oil, water and methane. Naturally, while being stored in an open pond, methane would be vented into the atmosphere, and according to the AGW credo, methane is much worse than CO2. So is such a concern possibly causing the oil pollution to continue unabated while the methane escapes anyway into the atmosphere?

David44
May 10, 2010 2:54 pm

@DCC said: “They weren’t trying to put it out, they were trying to salvage the hull.”
But they sank it which is why the riser lies leaking in the bottom, right? There must be a better way. I know nothing (obviously) about oil rigs or fire suppression, so maybe there isn’t. I suppose that even if they immediately killed all power so there wouldn’t be another spark, the hot stack would just reignite anyway – unless there was enough CO2 to cool it sufficiently. Not going to solve it here, but I hope “they” find something effective because it seems inevitable that somewhere, sometime there will be another blowout and fire on one of these offshore rigs. Offshore drilling could get banned now in U.S. waters, but it won’t everywhere.

wws
May 10, 2010 3:26 pm

Bob, I think the plan (if the cofferdam idea is to work at all) is to hook up piping to it and then to suck up the oil with a high capacity pump, just like from a straw, while shooting it into a supply boat that can separate the sea water and oil. (that equipment exists already, it’s not a problem) Of course if the tubing is clogged with hydrates this doesn’t work, just like the milkshake that’s too thick. Too much suction would just collapse the tubing if it’s clogged.

Layne Blanchard
May 10, 2010 3:49 pm

A couple of good ole boys outwit the experts…

John Cooper
May 10, 2010 4:29 pm

I went grocery shopping today and the price of frozen fish and ‘fish-sticks’ was up 20%-50% from six months ago. Coincidence?

David44
May 10, 2010 4:31 pm

@Layne Blanchard
Country common sense at work! Y’all can’t get no more organic than grass and hay.

May 10, 2010 5:08 pm

Maybe they could burn magnesium flares inside the box to warm up the slush? Flares get their oxygen from the seawater, so there would be no extra oxygen to explode the methane.

May 10, 2010 5:33 pm

wws, smokey, bob, et al
I don’t think running power down 500o feet or insulating a tube is practical. Might it make more sense to put a radio controlled, battery operated dispensing unit that metered out a chemical like magnesium hydride inside the housing? Dispense the magnsesium hydride in small quantities as required and generate as much heat as needed. Of course if the dispensing unit sprouts a leak it could make things much… much… worse….

Gail Combs
May 10, 2010 6:10 pm

Layne Blanchard says:
May 10, 2010 at 3:49 pm
“A couple of good ole boys outwit the experts…”
Good idea and the oil can be recovered and used, but there goes my winter hay supply.

Joe
May 10, 2010 6:21 pm

Another e-mail just recieved from BP:
Prepared by the Joint Information Center
UPDATED May 10, 2010 7 PM
* For a full timeline of the Administration-wide response, visit the White House Blog.
PAST 24 HOURS
The President Meets with Cabinet Members in the Situation Room
President Obama met with a number of Cabinet members and senior staff in the White House Situation Room to review BP’s efforts to stop the oil leak as well as to decide on next steps to ensure all is being done to contain the spread, mitigate the environmental impact and provide assistance to affected states, including individuals, businesses, and communities.
The President asked Secretary Chu to lead a team of top administration officials and government scientists to Houston this week for an extensive dialogue with BP officials to continue to aggressively pursue potential solutions.
In addition, to deal more generally with the harms created by oil spills, the President has requested that legislation be sent to Congress to toughen and update the law surrounding caps on damages.
EPA Administrator Jackson Returns to the Gulf Coast
Administrator Jackson made another visit to the Gulf region to oversee efforts to mitigate the environmental and human health impact of the ongoing BP oil spill—visiting Baton Rouge, La., to receive a briefing by Louisiana State University scientists; and Robert, La., to receive a briefing by federal agency scientists.
Secretary Salazar Dispatches Top Land Management Official
Interior Secretary Ken Salazar announced today that Director of the Bureau of Land Management Robert Abbey has been dispatched to the Gulf Coast to support ongoing response efforts to the BP Deepwater oil spill.
Navy Supports Skimming Operations
The U.S. Navy is providing assistance in the areas of skimming and salvage operations—including 16 Modular Skimming Systems deployed to Gulfport, Miss. 1,400 total associated Department of Defense personnel have been deployed in support of spill cleanup and mitigation.
New Staging Location Opens in Amelia, La.
14 staging areas have been set up to protect vital shoreline in all potentially affected Gulf Coast states (Biloxi, Miss., Pascagoula, Miss., Pensacola, Fla., Panama City, Fla., Dauphin Island, Ala., Grand Isle, La., Shell Beach, La., Slidell, La., Venice, La., Orange Beach, Al., Theodore, Al., Pass Christian, Ms., Amelia, La., and Cocodrie, La.).
Property Damage Claims Processed
BP reports that 5,710 property damage claims have been opened, from which $2.4 million has been disbursed. No claims have been denied at this time. Approximately 60 operators are answering phones, and average wait time is currently less than a minute. To file a claim, or report spill-related damage, call BP’s helpline at (800) 440-0858. For those who have already pursued the BP claims process and are not satisfied with BP’s resolution, can call the Coast Guard at (800) 280-7118.
NOAA Conducts Research and Evaluation
NOAA Research is evaluating the information obtained from the NOAA P-3 (hurricane hunter) aircraft flight over the Gulf of Mexico Loop Current on May 8.
Lessons Learned from Exxon Valdez Examined
Alaska and Louisiana Sea Grant personnel are meeting regularly with Alaska Oil Spill Responders to explore lessons learned from the Exxon Valdez incident and possible applications to the Deepwater Horizon. NOAA’s Sea Grant is a university-based network of more than 3,000 scientists, engineers and educators.
Fish & Wildlife Field Crews Respond
Eight field crews have been deployed from the Dennis Pass Wildlife Staging Area to observe the impact on wildlife due to the spill. Wildlife search and capture teams conducted boat operations from the Lake Borgne to the Southwest Pass of the Mississippi River and west to Cameron, La. Four helicopters conducted aerial surveys to observe wildlife and determine if rescue operations are needed in potentially affected areas.
Water and Sediment is Sampled
The U.S. Geological Survey completed water and sediment sampling at 16 sites along coastal Alabama and Mississippi. USGS is preparing for sampling in Texas and Florida, and also for sea-grass bed surveys.
Plans Begin for Bioremediation
USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service is assessing the capabilities of Plant Materials Centers and asking commercial growers to ramp up plant propagation efforts for potential future bioremediation efforts.
Aerial Dispersant Spray Missions Flown
Modular Aerial Spray System (MASS) aircraft flew multiple missions—dispensing the same dispersant chemical being used by BP and the federal responders. These systems are capable of covering up to 250 acres per flight.
By the Numbers to Date:
* Personnel were quickly deployed and approximately 10,000 are currently responding to protect the shoreline and wildlife.
* More than 290 vessels are responding on site, including skimmers, tugs, barges, and recovery vessels to assist in containment and cleanup efforts—in addition to dozens of aircraft, remotely operated vehicles, and multiple mobile offshore drilling units.
* More than 1 million feet of boom (regular and sorbent) have been deployed to contain the spill—and more than 1.3 million feet are available.
* Nearly 3.5 million gallons of an oil-water mix have been recovered.
* Approximately 325,000 gallons of dispersant have been deployed. More than 500,000 gallons are available.
* 14 staging areas have been set up to protect vital shoreline in all potentially affected Gulf Coast states (Biloxi, Miss., Pascagoula, Miss., Pensacola, Fla., Panama City, Fla., Dauphin Island, Ala., Grand Isle, La., Shell Beach, La., Slidell, La., Venice, La., Orange Beach, Al., Theodore, Al., Pass Christian, Ms., Amelia, La., and Cocodrie, La.).
Resources:
* For information about the response effort, visit http://www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com.
* For specific information about the federal-wide response, visit http://www.whitehouse.gov/deepwater-bp-oil-spill.
* To contact the Deepwater Horizon Joint Information Center, call (985) 902-5231.
* To volunteer, or to report oiled shoreline, call (866) 448-5816. Volunteer opportunities can also be found here.
* To submit your vessel as a vessel of opportunity skimming system, or to submit alternative response technology, services, or products, call 281-366-5511.
* To report oiled wildlife, call (866) 557-1401. Messages will be checked hourly.
* For information about validated environmental air and water sampling results, visit http://www.epa.gov/bpspill.
* For National Park Service updates about potential park closures, resources at risk, and NPS actions to protect vital park space and wildlife, visit http://www.nps.gov/aboutus/oil-spill-response.htm.
* To file a claim, or report spill-related damage, call BP’s helpline at (800) 440-0858. A BP fact sheet with additional information is available here. For those who have already pursued the BP claims process and are not satisfied with BP’s resolution, can call the Coast Guard at (800) 280-7118. More information about what types of damages are eligible for compensation under the Oil Pollution Act as well as guidance on procedures to seek that compensation can be found here.
AUDIO RELEASE: Unified Area Command press briefing May 10, 2010
Download audio file by clicking HERE
ROBERT, La. – U.S. Coast Guard Rear Adm. Mary Landry, the federal on-scene coordinator, Doug Suttles, BP Chief Operating Officer, and Lars Herbst, MMS Regional Director of the Gulf of Mexico Region, hold a briefing here May, 10, 2010 to update the media and the public and to answer questions. In the briefing, members of the unified area command discussed several topics, including the oil spill clean-up efforts currently underway. U.S. Coast Guard audio clip by Petty Officer 3rd Class Cory J. Mendenhall.

May 10, 2010 8:26 pm

http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2010/05/gulf-spill-did-pesky-hydrates-tr.html
“Methane-trapping ice of the kind that has frustrated the first attempt to contain oil gushing offshore of Louisiana may have been a root cause of the blowout that started the spill in the first place, according to University of California, Berkeley, professor Robert Bea, who has extensive access to BP p.l.c. documents on the incident. If methane hydrates are eventually implicated, the U.S. oil and gas industry would have to tread even more lightly as it pushes farther and farther offshore in search of energy.”

Konrad
May 10, 2010 8:27 pm

One simple but totally politically incorrect method of keeping the containment dome warm would be to bolt some shielded uranium fuel rods to the casing and insulate the exterior. Nuclear fuels can provide a steady heat for years in sub critical quantities. This has been used to power Seabeck effect generators in many spacecraft including Voyager. 5000 ft power cords would not be needed, just more spine than the average politician possesses…

May 10, 2010 8:32 pm

…a sludge-like mix of stuff and water that would take an eternity to separate into oil and water…
Bob, in oil fields with low production wells, separater tanks are used. The mixture of oil, brine, and crap is pumped into the tank and either allowed to naturally separate (a week or 2?), or the tank is heated (by propane). We designed, built, and tested a rugged
“mobile” prototype solar heater for use in oil fields. The dumb-as-rocks free-ranging cattle ate the hi-tech insulation, but it worked well (just too expensive).