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.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
143 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Mike H.
May 10, 2010 8:42 pm

How ’bout applying subsonic waves to break up the methane hydrates that are keeping the bottom from sealing? How much stronger than water ice are they at those depths?

May 10, 2010 9:26 pm

Video, supposedly of the BP well’s BOP.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-grandia/first-underwater-footage_b_567007.html
Finger-pointing in Washington hearing tomorrow: http://tinyurl.com/26xxutd
Flexible tubing will not collapse even at depth, as long as it is filled with water. Water is virtually incompressible. OTEC systems use similar piping to bring up very cold water to the surface (Ocean Temperature Energy Conversion systems).

CRS, Dr.P.H.
May 10, 2010 9:45 pm

Leif Svalgaard says:
May 10, 2010 at 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.”
——
REPLY: Thanks, Leif, that is a very credible explanation for how the sequence of events happened. Best technical explanation I’ve seen yet, but I’m sure we’ll see many more.
Oh yeah, the sun is blank, no sunspots.

Wren
May 10, 2010 11:26 pm

Doug Badgero says:
May 10, 2010 at 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.
========
The Dutch method is to skim oily water from the sea, separate the oil from the water with equipment onboard ship, retain the oil, and return the water to the sea. Because of onboard equipment limitations, the returned water still contains some oil. I could be wrong, but this sounds like a vessel of opportunity skimming method private boat owners may already be using under contract with BP (see link). If it is being used, I am puzzled by the Dutch claims about EPA not permitting it.
http://www.brighthub.com/engineering/marine/articles/37290.aspx
The other method is to carry the skimmed oily water by ship or barge to onshore facilities that do a more thorough job of separating the oil from the water before returning the water to the sea. I can understand why this is the preferred method.

May 11, 2010 6:37 am

Wren;
The other method is to carry the skimmed oily water by ship or barge to onshore facilities that do a more thorough job of separating the oil from the water before returning the water to the sea. I can understand why this is the preferred method>>
Would the preference not be to do as much as you can with the “best” method and apply the “second best” method to anything that is over and above the capacity of the “best” method? Which makes more sense? Do a good job on some and a nearly as good job on more, or just do a good job on some?

Wren
May 11, 2010 9:00 am

davidmhoffer says:
May 11, 2010 at 6:37 am
Wren;
The other method is to carry the skimmed oily water by ship or barge to onshore facilities that do a more thorough job of separating the oil from the water before returning the water to the sea. I can understand why this is the preferred method>>
Would the preference not be to do as much as you can with the “best” method and apply the “second best” method to anything that is over and above the capacity of the “best” method? Which makes more sense? Do a good job on some and a nearly as good job on more, or just do a good job on some?
—————–
I think they may already be using the second best method , the Vessel of Opportunity Skimming System(VOSS)described by the Dutch ship owners. Read the first link and look at the photo 7 in the second link.
http://www.brighthub.com/engineering/marine/articles/37290.aspx
http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/usa/features/article_1554119.php/In-Pictures-Gulf-Oil-Spill-Containment-Attempts-
I am puzzled by the Dutch ship owner’s claim that EPA doesn’t permit a VOSS that may already be in use. Perhaps it’s a different method or there are issues with the Dutch that aren’t being explained.

Bill Parsons
May 11, 2010 10:37 am

Layne Blanchard says:
May 10, 2010 at 3:49 pm
A couple of good ole boys outwit the experts

The method looks promising. What are the officials saying?

Rosalind
May 11, 2010 2:10 pm

Here is an interesting take on the disaster from a system-safety-engineering standpoint, on a social science blog:
http://understandingsociety.blogspot.com/2010/05/system-safety-engineering-and-deepwater.html

Doug Badgero
May 11, 2010 5:14 pm

Rosalind,
I have worked in Nuclear Power for 25 years and safety systems design is where my first thought went after hearing of this accident. In particular:
A well head blowout should be considered an eventuality not a remote possibility.
AND
There should be AT LEAST two INDEPENDENT means of isolation capable of isolating under “accident” conditions.
The key is determining what accident conditions look like and having two systems that are truly independent. I hope this is where we go from here.

bob paglee
May 11, 2010 6:53 pm

I have read somewhere that the latest concept involves a riser having a two-foot diameter to be flooded with seawater and attached to the top of the smaller dome, with a 6-inch drill pipe within it in an annular coaxial arrangement to bring up the slush from the biggest leak inside the drill pipe. As I understand it, instead of pumping slush up from the bottom, the concept involves pumping seawater into the riser at the surface, expecting the additional pressure at the bottom to force the slush up the drill pipe and into a recovery vessel.
However, wouldn’t this concept require a rather good seal between the bottom edge of the dome and the sea floor to minimize leakage and maintain the extra pressure from the surface pump? This is a possible alternative to the big problems involved with a heavy, fairly high-voltage electrical cable and perhaps a voltage step-down transformer at the bottom that could be needed to power a big pump on the sea floor, but I hope they are looking at that and other backup concepts if the latest one doesn’t work out.

CRS, Dr.P.H.
May 11, 2010 9:13 pm

OK, the White House FINALLY gets its message straight on the difference between SWAT (special weapons and tactics) and SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threads):
http://www.tampabay.com/news/humaninterest/qampa-the-swat-team-vs-the-swot-team/1094078
Took ’em long enough! Good article, better late than never.

CRS, Dr.P.H.
May 11, 2010 9:14 pm

Oops, SWOT is Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and THREATS, not threads!

May 12, 2010 9:44 pm

re the “good old boys” and the hay absorbent.
These guys are good. What they don’t say, though, is how cold the water is, and how thick the oil. Also, how fine is the mesh on the strainer the guy used. Try this without the hay, and you can scoop up the oil out of the water with that strainer! Cold oil has a very high viscosity (makes it thick), so it will not flow through the mesh on that strainer.
Did anybody else catch that?

max_b
May 12, 2010 11:38 pm

I still find it an odd coincidence that this occured approx 20 days after Obama’s announcement of the 31st March, which lifted a 30 year moratorium on offshore oil and gas exploration around the US coastline.
At the moment, there are parts of the US establishment, the UK and western europe who probably don’t want the US to focus on oil/gas at home, a policy which would result in US disengagement overseas.
At the moment Europe is looking at a future dependent on a Russian gas supplies (Nord Stream, Blue Stream, South Stream pipelines), the alternative EU/US Nabucco pipeline project remains stuck due to Putin’s clever tactics. Without US help to unblock this project Europe would fall under Russia’s sphere of influence. I doubt that the the UK establishment will tolerate any dependance on Russian gas for itself, or indeed the rest of Europe… and all that it would mean.

jobethian
May 13, 2010 12:42 am

Eye-witness claims that “Static Electricity” may have ignited some (methane?) gas causing several explosions, killing 11 people, initiating 3 underwater gushers and ultimately sinking the entire rig.
Static Electricity? That’s weak.
But it’s also a fantastic story! An environmentalist wet-dream that ultimately turns very profitable for the Obots and eliminates all oil-drilling in the future only if they can convince enough people this fairy-tale scenario is plausible. Which it isn’t.

May 15, 2010 6:43 am

The good the bad and the ugly–
http://oil-price.net/en/articles/use-nukes-to-contain-the-oil-spill.php
million gallons a day
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/may/13/bp-oil-spill-ocean-footage
A–How much value has been(will be)
lost in Gulf waterfront property–
especially high priced beach front
and commercial–
Will obama bail out the real estate companies
and banks again(as people walk away from property
or are newly foreclosured)?
B–And the housing of the homeless has been
solved -The abandoned waterfront houses of the wealthy
will now be empty for at least the next 50 years
and the govt cannot afford to demolish them
or secure them–
Therefore the homeless can
move into these abandoned Gulf homes–
and (bonus) the homeless will be
exterminated by the oil fumes–
the fumes will prevent decay so there
will be no need for burials of the
mummified homeless bodies.
Some of the components of the Gulf
milieu are very similar to the
ones used in
egyptian mummification
(although I am certain our
“technical” experts will disagree–
but without presenting any documentation).
http://www2.tbo.com/content/2010/may/09/na-bp-looks-to-charter-panhandle-boats/
C– will the oil increase the surface water temperature
sufficiently to increase evaporation or will
the slick prevent evaporation of the underlying water?
D–Wave height should be decreased by
the surface oil(you know–“oil on troubled waters”)
E–Poor can now return to live in
newly abandoned New Orleans
for at least the next 50 years
(without concern for gentrification)
Jazz revival without tourists can be expected.
(also without FEMA
backwater or any police–
since law enforcement personnel
will refuse to work or live in the
health risky, deadly contaminated area)
F–Damage to Gulf industries and
shipping and mississippi shipping
should generate govt grants and loans
that should stimulate the economy.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=19068
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/05/10/93859/us-agency-lets-oil-industry-write.html
G–Illegal Immigration is solved by putting
illegal immigrants to work
in the Gulf industries because the native
workers will abandon the Gulf.
H–Cuban problem is solved as cuba is
inundated by the oil –making it uninhabitable for
both the revolutionaries and the cuban Miami Mafia.
The oil slick appears to have already reached cuba.
http://rapidfire.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/realtime/single.php?2010134/crefl1_143.A2010134161000-2010134161500.500m.jpg
click on 500M on the left
(not coincidentally–these gulf pictures
appear to have been discontinued–
although surrounding area pics continue)
I–The poor living in the gulf area(those not mummified)
will become genetically modified to survive
(you know Darwin “evolution” “selection of the species”)
in the oil enriched environment–
and become the only humans(?) in the area.
J–Most of the new gulf wells
(maybe the past 10 thousand wells)
are not yet producing–
they are just capped and inventoried
as a company asset and they
can be made to produce with very little effort–
so stopping drilling in the
gulf now wont affect gulf production
for the next 100 years.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/12/bp-whistleblower-claimed_n_573839.html
http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/05/09/1620454/as-oil-wells-went-deeper-safety.html
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=19151
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=19134
Just keep pretending this is just
another lil ol spill.
Nuke it or drown in oil.

Rick Zuber
June 3, 2010 3:47 pm

Plain and simple, we need to get off of toxic energy sources and move to more begnine sources like solar and wind power.
“…Covering 4% of the world’s desert area with photovoltaics could supply the equivalent of all of the world’s electricity. The Gobi Desert alone could supply almost all of the world’s total electricity demand…”(*1)
Then there’s solar concentrator towers that produce massive amounts of power by generating steam to turn turbines. The molten salts get so hot that the power plant also runs at night.(*2)
We can then use high speed rail to distribute goods, services and paassengers cross country faster and far cheaper than cars and diesel trucks and do it with zero effluent.
They are used all over the world but the US has fallen behind.
Personal vehicles for commuting can be charged with solar/wind systems at home and plugged in at work where 4MW GE turbines (like the ones being installed in Lake Erie right now)will power the grid in combination with solar arrays on commercial roof tops.
Coal and nuclear power will be a relegated to a dark time in our past.
One lesson we don’t seem to have learned is that there is nothing that man has made that has not experienced catastrophic failure. No matter how hard we try no matter what ‘fail-safe’ devices we employ they still fail. Consequently in order to minimize damage to our natural life support system we need to expand the use of more begnine energy technologies.
The computer I am writing this on is powered by a renewable solar/wind system that provides me with 95% of my energy consumption for our home. When we get a Nissan Leaf we will add to the system to be able to charge the vehicle easily whether it is cloudy or clear. This will eliminate the need for petroleum for commuting to work which is about 90% of our travels.
If we as a nation minimize our need for petroleum then we won’t have to engage in wars and risky behavour to satisfy our addiction.
We could begin to dismantle the island of roughly six million tons of plastic in the ocean that is twice the size of Texas(*3) and make plastic items out of corn and soy which are already in common use and are quickly biodegradable.
Lets face it, burning oil and coal to produce energy is stone age technology. It is dirty, messy and toxic and is poisoning us and our planet.
In 1990 the rate of autism was 1 in 10,000 today it is 1 in 150. Autism has been linked to mercury and other toxins and coal fired power plants are one of the highest polluters of mercury that there is.
The EPA has recently changed their position on certain sea foods because of mercury contamination. They are now saying that any woman of child bearing age and any child under the age of 12 should totally avoid eating halibut that weigh over 100 pounds because of the high mercury levels.
What happens to a society when your food makes you sick? What happens when 50% of a society is mentally handicapped? At the rate we are going it will not be long.
Our ability to procreate is also dropping at an alarming rate.
People are crisis oriented and often will not change until the 11th hour, meanwhile the red warning flags are accelerating.
People don’t want to let go and are afraid of change because the new is not as familiar as the old. And it seems that we will go kicking and screaming, ‘I want my oil’.
The same old archaic and toxic energy systems must go. We need to change as indications are that we will be facing unnecessarily dire consequences.
(*1) http://www.eia.doe.gov/kids/energy.cfm?page=solar_home-basics
(*2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PS10_solar_power_tower
(*3)http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6206498.ece

1 4 5 6