Canada requires oil companies drill a relief well alongside the exploratory well

[WeDidIt]

We could learn from the Canadians.

[neverforget]

1. We could but will the oil companies allow the government to make them do it?

It seems the regulators have all been busy doing anything but regulating.

[WeDidIt]

3. It's up to Congress

Congress would have to legislate it first.

Maybe now is the time to push for quick legislation. Maybe such legislation should force those wells currently eing drilled off shore to stop until a relief well can catch up to them.

And because redundancy should be done in triplicate, deep water drilling should probably have two relief wells drilled along side the exploratory well in case the first relief well misses.

[Cattledog]

2. Is there a link?

I think this is very interesting and would like some more info.

thanks,

CD

[WeDidIt]

4. Heard it on Countdown.

I'll see if I can catch the guest's name in the replay. In the mean time, let me try my Google-fu

[WeDidIt]

5. And it appears Chevron is using two relief wells

in the deepest Canadian off shore effort to date, 8530 feet.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/afp/100512/canada/canada_energy_oil_environment

[charlesg]

6. "current safety requirement that undersea wells must include a side relief well"

http://www.thiscantbehappening.net/node/65

In an incredible display of corporate arrogance, BP is claiming that a current safety requirement that undersea wells drilled during the newly ice-free summer must also include a side relief well, so as to have a preventive measure in place that could shut down a blown well, is “too expensive” and should be eliminated.

Yet clearly, if the US had had such a provision in place, the Deepwater Horizon blowout could have been shut down right almost immediately after it blew out, just by turning of a valve or two, and then sealing off the blown wellhead.

A relief well is ”too expensive”?

[Jkid]

7. Too expensive for their corporate profits

[WeDidIt]

9. As I linked above, Chevron is drilling two relief wells beside their newest

deep water venture which is in water more than 3000 feet deeper than Deepwater Horizon.

So I think anything offshore should have a relief well beside it and anything in water deeper than 1000 feet should have two.

[one_voice]

8. What the hell do you mean..

learn from the Canadians?!?!? We're flucking America, we don't need no learnin' from any other country. You Amurica hatin' librul!!

:sarcasm:


I agree sounds like we could learn something. You're never too good to stop learning, and to be better. :-)

[WeDidIt]

10. Fuck, after using my Google-fu on this, I like Chevron's plan for a deep water drill site better

They're using two relief wells along side the exploratory well in water 8350 feet deep.

[one_voice]

11. Oh, that's even better...

Shouldn't some type of oversight demand that if you drill here, this is something you must do. Or would that be too much government involvement? God forbid. :eyes:

[WeDidIt]

12. Need a law for it.

BP fought the Canadian requirement.

[one_voice]

13. Yeah, that's what I meant by oversight..

passing a law requiring it. But you know there would people (you know who they are) that would be whining about too much government involvement. They'd sooner see repeats of this horrible tragedy, than go against big oil. It's pretty frickin' disgusting.

[Electric Monk]

16. Brings new meaning to "Drill, baby, drill"

Gonna drill for oil? Drill in triplicate for safety while you're at it :)

[FarCenter]

14. Drillin relief wells would keep our good ole boys from gittin 'er done

[FarCenter]

15. "Ready, fire, aim" -- it's the 'murican way!

[Crabby Appleton]

17. Not exactly - Canada requires a relief well for drilling in

the Beaufort Sea area - that is over on the west side of Canada - a difficult area to reach. The Chevron Lona O-55 deep well is is located NE of Newfoundland, not in the Beaufort Sea. For the Lona O-55 they have 2 ships available to drill relief wells if necessary.