- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: When they start to close the valves...
Posted on 7/14/10 at 7:03 am to STEVED00
Posted on 7/14/10 at 7:03 am to STEVED00
quote:
The goal is to make P(hydro) greater than P(formation) so that the flow stops. (That's a bit oversimplified, but close enough.)
I'm clear on that and understand that perfectly.
Here's what I don't. It's formation pressure that is felt throughout the system and is what we're fighting, right? Any pressure equalization, regardless of where flow is stopped, will be whatever the formation pressure is, right? If you stop the flow on top with the cap, pressure throughout the system equalizes to formation pressure. If you stop flow on the bottom, from that point down, pressure equalizes to formation pressure. So what difference does it make of where you stop flow in regards to creating other leaks in the sea floor/subsurface if the integrity of these areas is suspect?
In other words, if a cap on top causes subsurface/sea floor leakage, what makes the bottom kill any different? Your still relying on the same sea floor to hold back the same formation pressure. Is it that the cement that is pumped in will also enter the formation and fill any cracks that may form in the process?
Not trying to be argumentative. I have no expertise in the oil field, but I do understand pressure and that issue remains unclear to me.
This post was edited on 7/14/10 at 7:06 am
3
Posted on 7/14/10 at 7:30 am to Tiger-Striped-Bass
One question that has been lingering in my head is that: since this is a high pressure well (to the extent that they want to kill it because pressure is too high?), would they encounter the similar issues in being able to hold down the pressure once the relief wells hit the main target well bore?
Posted on 7/14/10 at 10:14 am to Tiger-Striped-Bass
quote:
The goal is to make P(hydro) greater than P(formation) so that the flow stops. (That's a bit oversimplified, but close enough.)
this will put the system in balance...
Posted on 7/14/10 at 10:33 am to Tiger-Striped-Bass
quote:
Here's what I don't. It's formation pressure that is felt throughout the system and is what we're fighting, right? Any pressure equalization, regardless of where flow is stopped, will be whatever the formation pressure is, right? If you stop the flow on top with the cap, pressure throughout the system equalizes to formation pressure. If you stop flow on the bottom, from that point down, pressure equalizes to formation pressure. So what difference does it make of where you stop flow in regards to creating other leaks in the sea floor/subsurface if the integrity of these areas is suspect?
I think this is the source of your confusion. The pressure is not the same everywhere. Pressure at any point in the system is the reservoir pressure minus the hydrostatic head between those two points. Go back to the equation I posted. So the higher up the well, the lower the pressure. The reason is that the weight of the oil column "pushes down" on the formation and reduces the pressure at that point. The more oil in between, the more the pressure reduction and the lower the pressure at that point. In the case of oil, it's not heavy enough to completely overcome the reservoir pressure. This is why they want to see 8000-9000 psi at the surface when they do the integrity test. Kill mud is heavier and it will overcome that pressure.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News