BP captures 1% more of leaking oil with LMRP, say they're "very pleased"

[wtmusic]

"'That operation has gone extremely well. We are very pleased.' That was BP VP Bob Fryar’s assessment today of his company’s success in capturing some of the oil gushing from its wild well on the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico. Yesterday, we said that the cap seemed headed for failure. So who’s right? As usual, it gets down to how you define 'success' and 'failure' (and on how you do the math).

From Top Kill to Containment

First, it’s important to note that BP has moved the goal posts after the process known as 'Top Kill' failed. Actually, it’s more like they started playing a different game altogether, and they managed to did it without drawing media attention. Top Kill was the last in a long line of attempts to shut the well down — as the word 'kill' implies. BP’s new game is designed, at best, to divert a portion of the oil up a pipe to the surface. Killing the well won’t be accomplished until relief wells tap into the existing pipe far below the ocean floor and inject cement there. BP has said that will take until August. (Some experts believe it will take longer, perhaps an additional six months.)"

http://thephoenixsun.com/archives/10013

BP uses "slick" accounting to turn 1% into 31%. Poof!

[aquart]

1. Anyone else pleased?

I know I'm not.

[wtmusic]

2. This is infuriating

I was all for giving BP then benefit of the doubt. But more and more, it appears as though they're engaging in a PR job to make it look like they're trying to stop it, but really trying to save their little moneymaker at the expense of the Gulf of Mexico and all the life therein.

What are the options? Everyone seems to think we're at BP's mercy, but I could see Obama moving to seize the well and have a competitor like Chevron or Exxon shut the damn thing down - and send the bill to BP. There are several scenarios where killing the well is feasible - yet they seem to escape consideration:

1) Use of a "saddle", or larger-diameter pipe welded to the riser with a valve on it. After installation the valve is closed.

2) If concrete can be pumped through through longer relief wells currently being drilled, it can be pumped through a smaller-diameter pipe stuck into the riser.

3) A smaller-diameter pipe tipped with an expansion anchor is inserted into the riser. A motor turns the screw which expands the anchor, and shuts down the well.

[Nihil]

3. "their little moneymaker"?

:wtf:

You have an interesting approach to "making money" ...

Anyway, addressing your three suggestions:

> 1) Use of a "saddle", or larger-diameter pipe welded to the riser
> with a valve on it. After installation the valve is closed.

The pressures involved and the current state of the wellhead mean that
the act of closing the valve would almost certainly cause the fragmentation
of the ground around the wellhead, thus turning a single nozzle of oil/gas
outflow into a large friable area of subsidiary leaks that would not only
be impossible to seal from above but would be near impossible to capture
even as much as they are doing at the moment.

> 2) If concrete can be pumped through through longer relief wells currently
> being drilled, it can be pumped through a smaller-diameter pipe stuck into
> the riser.

Quite apart from the difficulty involved with inserting a "smaller-diameter
pipe" into the ~9000psi outflow through the BOP, that "smaller" pipe would
have to be so much smaller (in order to fit through the BOP line with some of
the rams that are in a partially-operated state) that you would not be able
to pump anything as viscous as cement through it.

Remember that this is a small pipe that is nearly a mile below the pump ...
Also remember how much of the drilling mud was simply blown out of the way
during previous attempts and that this would have been at much higher rates
of fluid flow than you are going to achieve with cement.


> 3) A smaller-diameter pipe tipped with an expansion anchor is inserted into
> the riser. A motor turns the screw which expands the anchor, and shuts down
> the well.

This suffers from both of the previous problems: both the "smaller-diameter pipe"
and the "expansion anchor" have to be so damn small to fit through the mess of
steelwork at the wellhead - against the pressure of the outflow - that the
mechanics of any expansion operator would be beyond anything they could get
in there. If they did manage it, again the weakness immediately below the
wellhead would present the same risks as in #1.


I know people are getting unbelievably frustrated at having to wait for the
relief wells to arrive but that is really the only option to securely and
safely seal that pipe and all the wishful thinking in the world is merely
a distraction to pass the time until this happens.

:shrug: