News Is Offshore Oil Drilling Truly Safe?

[jreelawg]

If we can't enforce the regulations now, how will we be able to enforce them later. Whether the MMS is just ran by idiots, or ran by oil profiteers, or bribed, or doing lines of cocaine and having sex with prostitutes at oil company parties. There is a factor of human error or maybe willful.

Meanwhile, a blowout is beyond worst case scenario when it comes to preparation.

Drilling a relief well, actually doesn't double your chances of a disaster though does it? If only one out of thousands of wells experience blowouts, what are the chances of 2 wells in the same spot blowing out? In my view it at least cuts the chances of a disaster in half.

 

[stewartcs]

Are you saying that it would be hypocritical to ban deep drilling in the gulf, and let people drive cars as well?

I'm saying that everyone is riding the band wagon on banning offshore drilling without thinking. That statement is to make those people, like yourself, realize that you are being hypocrites by saying ban deepsea drilling while stating with your actions (by driving a car) that it is OK to do something equally damaging to the environment (probably more damaging IMO).

Granted a lot of people die in car accidents, why don't we just spill a bunch of oil as well in the ocean too, just to be fair?

That's just ridiculous. The point is that there are certain levels of risk that we as a society are willing to accept for the given reward.

CS

 

[stewartcs]

If we can't enforce the regulations now, how will we be able to enforce them later. Whether the MMS is just ran by idiots, or ran by oil profiteers, or bribed, or doing lines of cocaine and having sex with prostitutes at oil company parties. There is a factor of human error or maybe willful.

Like we do with every other similar problem. Make the regulations more strict and provide more oversight.

CS

 

[stewartcs]

...Could you drill a relief and cement it closed, or bottom fill in such a way that re-opening it would take little time?

Sure. Happens all of the time. The well is cemented closed and then drilling vessel (and BOP) is removed. A production platform comes in and opens it back up after placing the subsea production architecture.

Even if we must use another BOP, as Stewart keeps pointing out, this was HUMAN failure. If we had a relief well with BOP, always "off", except for emergencies, there would be no element of human error.

What do you mean by always off? Shut perhaps? If so then please note that the BOP has to remain open while drilling since the drill string rotates through it.

I also want to point out again that we are not sure of exactly what has happened yet. Certainly human error was what caused all of this in the first place. However, we are not sure as to why the BOP's have not been able to seal the well as designed. This could have very well been due to human error as well in either the operation of or maintenance of the BOPs. But we just don't know yet.

CS

 

[rhody]

I posted this in my own thread, but thought it important enough to reproduce here:

Food for thought...

This sort of thing has been going on in Nigeria for decades and neither Europe or the US seems to care,
amazing: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/may/30/oil-spills-nigeria-niger-delta-shell"

Very sad...

Rhody...

Note to Russ:

This is why I keep dropping out of this thread: A useful discussion cannot be held if people are reacting based on emotion and not comprehending relatively straightforward points of discussion!

Hang in there, I am following your arguments, not based on emotion, and appreciate your posts.

 

[rhody]

Interesting interview: flash podcast: Buddy Cianci and Max Hadberger: deckhand mate on oilfield supply vessel. Supplies firsthand knowledge of BP, was a MUD Engineer, KILL Specialist, if you want just the interview fast forward to about 6 minutes, interesting stuff.

Rhody...

 

[Office_Shredder]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/06/08/national/main6561020.shtml?tag=stack

Deepwater Horizon: Not the only rig that's leaking.

Forget earthquakes. The end of the world will be 40 days and 40 nights of every oil rig leaking

 

[mheslep]

What do our resident experts think of this? http://www.newsinferno.com/archives/20988

Professor Liefer is part of the government group testing the flow rate,

I don't think so. Do you have source for that statement.

I see this statement

“It’s apparent that BP is playing games with us, presumably under the advice of their legal team,” Dr. Leifer said.

A scientist attempting to do a technical study on the flow that allows himself to be sidetracked into baseless speculation about the 'legal team' is a hack.

 

[mheslep]

Again, this is a member of the Flow Estimate Team, not a random academic. He claims that BP's own numbers indicate that ~100,000 bbl/day (they released an upper limit of 160,000 bbl/day for a completely free flowing pipe) could occur. Liefer points out that it could be more or less, and also is angry that BP withheld high resolution video for so long..

Ok Liefer was a non-government member of the Flow Team. Where's this 100,000 bbl/day claim from Liefer? Where's the 160k bbl/day free flow from BP? They're not in the newsinferno or PBS links?

 

[russ_watters]

Or that is one pissed-off scientist...

Pissed-off scientists and scientists who have previously shown poor judgement/scientific rigor (Werely) should be excluded from the group. That said, I'm not surprised by the group's estimate. As I said previously, if you assume the Coast Guard/NOAA's 5,000 bbl/d estimate is accurate for the size of the plume, 12-19,000 is a reasonable estimate for the size of the leak given the undersea plumes and the fact that much of the oil is evaporating.

 

[russ_watters]

If we can't enforce the regulations now, how will we be able to enforce them later.

It is verrrrrry simple:
1. Hire inspectors and give them the resources needed to be inspectors.
2. Make penalties that stick and hurt. Fines and shutdowns.

This method would also make our coal mines safer - remember, the last major mine accident was due to exactly the same problems as this and the solution is also exactly the same.

Drilling a relief well, actually doesn't double your chances of a disaster though does it? If only one out of thousands of wells experience blowouts, what are the chances of 2 wells in the same spot blowing out? In my view it at least cuts the chances of a disaster in half.

If the odds are 1:1000 for an individual well, then the odds are 2:1000 for two wells: that's double the odds.

 

[russ_watters]

Russ: Could you drill a relief and cement it closed, or bottom fill in such a way that re-opening it would take little time?

Sure, but...

Even if we must use another BOP, as Stewart keeps pointing out, this was HUMAN failure. If we had a relief well with BOP, always "off", except for emergencies, there would be no element of human error.

A relief well is a well like any other well. The risks of one well are exactly the same as the risks of another well. If the "relief well" is drilled first, then what is backing it up in case it has a blowout?

It sounds like you guys think that there are no risks associated with the relief well itself. As if it is somehow different from another well and therefore incapable of a blowout. It isn't.

 

[russ_watters]

However, we are not sure as to why the BOP's have not been able to seal the well as designed. This could have very well been due to human error as well in either the operation of or maintenance of the BOPs. But we just don't know yet.

In other words, a combination of human error and human error...

As I said before and provided examples of, this is par for the course with these types of failures. It requires multiple simultaneous human errors to overcome good engineering.

 

[russ_watters]

How do you conclude that this number is reasonable? What data do you have to back this claim, and to show some knowledge about these plumes, what is on the surface, anf the deployment of dispersants?

I explained it immediately following the sentence you quoted. Is there something specific you don't understand? In any case, why are you arguing by proxy? If you don't believe the new government estimate, argue against it, not me. I didn't make the estimate and have nothing requiring substantiation!

I have, twice now, provided a fair amount of evidence to back what I have said...

To back up what? When? Do you mean this claim?:

He claims that BP's own numbers indicate that ~100,000 bbl/day (they released an upper limit of 160,000 bbl/day for a completely free flowing pipe) could occur. Liefer points out that it could be more or less, and also is angry that BP withheld high resolution video for so long.

It's looking like this is far worse than even some of the pessimists here have assumed, and in a week or so we're going to have the FET's estimate.

In that claim, you're mixing out of context non-sequiturs together. Those BP numbers are not measurements, they are theoretical safety calculations from before the well was even drilled. They are utterly meaningless for this discussion and you certainly have no real basis for that last sentence you posted.

...The US CG has been wrong since day one, when they first estimated the leak at 1000 bbl/day and then 5000 bbl/day, so why would I be listening to them now?

You have no basis for a claim that the USCG was wrong. As I've said before, a USCG researcher would certainly never make the mistake of figuring that the size of the surface slick was equal to the size of the leak and we have nothing to indicate such a mistake was made.

You have failed to respond to what I have provided, except for a single sentence taken out of context. I do not appreciate that at all.

mhselp was handling the rest pretty well and I don't appreciate unsourced claims and misinformation.

 

[russ_watters]

A relief well is not active, and that would seem to present a lower chance of disruption.

A well is a hole drilled into an oil reservoir. A relief well is a hole drilled into an oil reservoir. It most certainly **is** just as active as any other well!

Let me flip this over to try to get you to think it through: what, specifically, do you think is the difference between a "well" and a "relief well"?

In addition, what are the odds of both well blowing out at the same time?

If the odds of one well blowing out today are 1:1000 then the odds of another well blowing out today are 1:1000 and the odds of two blowing out today are 2:1000

 

[russ_watters]

Here's a sketch of a relief well: http://rovicky.files.wordpress.com/2006/08/relief-well-2.jpg

A few components/differences:
1. The relief well doesn't actually go all the way into the reservoir (is there a reisk of not judging the depth correctly?) but rather intersects the main well.
2. Based on #1, obviously the relief well comes after the main well. They can be started and drilled more or less simultaneously, but the relief well has to be behind the primary well.
3. Once drilled and connected, you just have a two-outlet, headered-together set of pipes. At the top of each, they look absolutely identical and at the bottom where they join, the pressures are identical. Each has to have a blowout preventer on it and each carries similar risk of a blowout.
4. The point of the relief well is to do exactly what was supposed to be done with the primary well beforee the BP supervisor had the drilling "mud" removed from the well: Since the "mud" is heavy, it exerts pressure at the bottom to keep the oil and gas from being pushed-up by the pressure in the reservoir.

So what's the difference between the "top kill" and "bottom kill"? In a top kill, there are two big problems, neither condition existing for the "bottom kill":
1. The pipe pumping the "mud" into the well goes in the side of the BOP and the top of the BOP is open, so the "top kill" mud can just spill out the top of the well and onto the seafloor, relieving the pressure and not forcing the oil down. For the "bottom kill", if the "mud" goes up the maini well, it eventually just fills up the well and still ends up stopping the oil.
2. Since the "bottom kill" happens an extra couple of miles down, it has a lot more pressure above it to force the "mud" down and can also rely somewhat on the weight of the oil. Ie, the pressure differential at the bottom is smaller than it is at the wellhead.

 

[mheslep]

12-19,000 is a reasonable estimate for the size of the leak given the undersea plumes and the fact that much of the oil is evaporating.

I've just seen that an estimated 20% of the Valdez spill evaporated. I would expect that much or more in the Gulf's warmer temperatures.

 

[jreelawg]

I am skeptical, that the estimate of 12-19k barrels per day is accurate. Why has BP been legally forced to, against their will, just yesterday release high definition video of the BOP after being cut? If the leak is as small as the estimates, then why are they still trying to cover up the necessary evidence in making an educated estimate?

BP pays a fine based on how many barrels have leaked.

The best way to get them to start being honest, would be to start the fine at the worst case scenario of 250,000 barrels. That way the truth will actually benefit them, maybe they would actually cooperate.

 

[jreelawg]

If your logic about 2 wells failing has any truth to it, then how do casinos make money.

What are the odds of winning the lotto once, compared to winning it twice in a row?

 

[mheslep]

It is verrrrrry simple:
1. Hire inspectors and give them the resources needed to be inspectors.
2. Make penalties that stick and hurt. Fines and shutdowns.

I find tougher regulation alone unsatisfactory as a solution. Government oversight is always subject to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture" in this political world as we have amply seen in this case; there's no corollary that says paying inspectors more or increasing penalties does away with capture.

instead, I favor a free market approach. 1) Grant substantial property rights to fisherman and tourism businesses, etc. If they own they parts of the Gulf, they'll make it their business to watch the drillers. 2) Require very large insurance policies by the drillers that pay out to those impacted by the spill to avoid the excessive legal wrangling (we are about to see). No policy, or policy canceled and drilling stops. Insurance companies have ample incentives to watch the operation of their policy holders.

 

[Office_Shredder]

I find tougher regulation alone unsatisfactory as a solution. Government oversight is always subject to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture" in this political world as we have amply seen in this case; there's no corollary that says paying inspectors more or increasing penalties does away with capture.

instead, I favor a free market approach. 1) Grant substantial property rights to fisherman and tourism businesses, etc. If they own they parts of the Gulf, they'll make it their business to watch the drillers. 2) Require very large insurance policies by the drillers that pay out to those impacted by the spill to avoid the excessive legal wrangling (we are about to see). No policy, or policy canceled and drilling stops. Insurance companies have ample incentives to watch the operation of their policy holders.

So you expect fishermen to regulate the oil industry, insurance companies to gladly pay out ten digit settlements without a fight, and the host of laws that would be required to detail what ocean ownership entails to just work itself out (this in itself would require as much regulation as we currently have probably)

 

[Pattonias]

I find tougher regulation alone unsatisfactory as a solution. Government oversight is always subject to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture" in this political world as we have amply seen in this case; there's no corollary that says paying inspectors more or increasing penalties does away with capture.

instead, I favor a free market approach. 1) Grant substantial property rights to fisherman and tourism businesses, etc. If they own they parts of the Gulf, they'll make it their business to watch the drillers. 2) Require very large insurance policies by the drillers that pay out to those impacted by the spill to avoid the excessive legal wrangling (we are about to see). No policy, or policy canceled and drilling stops. Insurance companies have ample incentives to watch the operation of their policy holders.

I think the result of this would be the fishing industry being bought up by the oil industry and the oil industry having legal ownership of the Gulf.

 

[mheslep]

So you expect fishermen to regulate the oil industry,

You're missing the point, which is (1) to develop a self interested, local lobby to prevent the oil industry from dominating the political conversation as they apparently do now, and (2) threaten the drillers with much higher legal damages, high enough to essentially cause the forfeiture of the offending drillers business.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

BP stock has lost half of its value since the crisis began
http://www.google.com/finance?chdnp...25024&chls=IntervalBasedLine&q=NYSE:BP&ntsp=0

 

[mheslep]

insurance companies to gladly pay out ten digit settlements without a fight,

http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2004/10/01/46438.htm"

 

[Office_Shredder]

http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2004/10/01/46438.htm"

Payouts from hurricane damage is basically old news. All legal wrangling has been completed years ago, and everyone knows the drill. It's when something extraordinary happens that requires insurance payouts that it's worth the time of the insurance company to exploit any gray areas and ambiguities that might exist (precisely because people are unfamiliar with the procedures can such a thing happen

Like when a hurricane causes a levy to collapse... is it hurricane or flood damage?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/b...o-1-million-katrina-flood-victims-506294.html

Or whether the WTC was one or two terrorist attacks (also mentioned in that article)

Whatever legal loopholes BP is currently jumping through to avoid paying, an insurance company would be doing exactly the same thing

 

[Ivan Seeking]

It is hard to say how bad this will get. My impression is that a near complete collapse of the Gulf ecosystem is well within the range of possibilities; esp depending on the weather. It all depends on how lucky we get and which way the wind blows. So far, the winds have been shifting, which has helped to keep the oil out at sea. Hopefully this will continue and the most sensitive wetlands can be saved. But in any case, I strongly suspect that this is going to produce the most dedicated generation of environmentalists that we have ever seen. The images of oil-soaked birds, and what's to come, I fear, will be seared into the memories of children and young adults, all over the world. I guess if there is a silver lining to this nightmare, that would be it.

I predict that this event marks the final death blow to the good-ole-boy, drill-baby-drill mentality, and the anti-environment movement. I cannot believe that a reckless disregard for environmental concerns is an attitude to be found in US politics again; at least, not to a siginficant degree, and not until the next generation comes along with no memory of this event, but we should be safe for the next twenty years or so.

 

[drankin]

It is hard to say how bad this will get. My impression is that a near complete collapse of the Gulf ecosystem is well within the range of possibilities; esp depending on the weather. It all depends on how lucky we get and which way the wind blows. So far, the winds have been shifting, which has helped to keep the oil out at sea. Hopefully this will continue and the most sensitive wetlands can be saved. But in any case, I strongly suspect that this is going to produce the most dedicated generation of environmentalists that we have ever seen. The images of oil-soaked birds, and what's to come, I fear, will be seared into the memories of children and young adults, all over the world. I guess if there is a silver lining to this nightmare, that would be it.

I predict that this event marks the final death blow to the good-ole-boy, drill-baby-drill mentality, and the anti-environment movement. I cannot believe that a reckless disregard for environmental concerns is an attitude to be found in US politics again; at least, not to a siginficant degree, and not until the next generation comes along with no memory of this event, but we should be safe for the next twenty years or so.

I don't see this ending the "drill-baby-drill" attitude at all. We need to end our reliance on foreign oil. This accident doesn't change that. It will cause us to better scrutinize the process though.

 

[russ_watters]

If your logic about 2 wells failing has any truth to it, then how do casinos make money.

What are the odds of winning the lotto once, compared to winning it twice in a row?

That is exactly how casinos make money. I was going to suggest to Geigerlick that he never go to a casino or play the lottery!

Twice as many players means twice as high overall odds of a winner but twice as many games being played for a constant profit margin per game and double the overall profit.

 

[stewartcs]

It is hard to say how bad this will get. My impression is that a near complete collapse of the Gulf ecosystem is well within the range of possibilities; esp depending on the weather. It all depends on how lucky we get and which way the wind blows. So far, the winds have been shifting, which has helped to keep the oil out at sea. Hopefully this will continue and the most sensitive wetlands can be saved.

It's funny how everyone is so concerned with the wetlands now that BP has their checkbook open.

Coastal Louisiana experiences the greatest wetland loss in the nation, and delta wetlands are now disappearing at an average rate of 17 square miles per year or about 50 acres per day (Gosselink, 1984; Conner and Day, 1988; Barras et al., 2003).

50 acres per day and no one gives a damn. But let some oil spill on it and it's the end of the world. Just another example of how people use a disaster to push their personal and political agendas. It's pathetic if you ask me.

Why don't the environmentalist care any other time?

CS