- 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
Relief well drilling halted while new cap is tested
Posted on 7/14/10 at 9:02 am
Posted on 7/14/10 at 9:02 am
Does this make sense, or is it just another BP decision driven by a financially-based desire not to spike the existing well?
4
Posted on 7/14/10 at 9:05 am to nycajun
maybe theyre extremely close to tapping into the well
Posted on 7/14/10 at 9:10 am to nycajun
CNN report said that well #1 was halted because they were afraid that a pressure rise when the new cap is closed could blow out the backside. I guess they are so close it wouldn't take much pressure to fracture the area between the primary well and the relief well.
Posted on 7/14/10 at 9:12 am to mylsuhat
quote:
maybe theyre extremely close to tapping into the well
They are extremely close.
Posted on 7/14/10 at 9:14 am to mylsuhat
quote:
maybe theyre extremely close to tapping into the well
They are. The question is, does it make sense to stop the relief well, which would, if successful, plug the main well permanently, in order to test the cap? If the cap works, then they can continue to take (and market) oil from the original well. If not, more oil in the marshes until the relief well is finished, and then they have to drill another well (if they are permitted) to tap into the reservoir. Or am I wrongly suggesting that BP is still motivated by the bottom line?
Posted on 7/14/10 at 9:15 am to PJinAtl
quote:
CNN report said that well #1 was halted because they were afraid that a pressure rise when the new cap is closed could blow out the backside. I guess they are so close it wouldn't take much pressure to fracture the area between the primary well and the relief well.
Does this explanation make more sense than my cynical speculation? Maybe so.
Posted on 7/14/10 at 9:19 am to nycajun
Are you guys positive they're not talking about DD II? It has paused so that it doesn't get too close and interfere with the ranging runs that DD III is doing. This was the plan all along.
Posted on 7/14/10 at 9:20 am to nycajun
Put it this way, there is NO FINANCIAL BENEFIT for BP delaying the well.
Posted on 7/14/10 at 9:29 am to MountainTiger
quote:You are right that relief well 2 is halted as to not interfere with relief well 1, but RW1 is halted due to new cap tests.
Are you guys positive they're not talking about DD II? It has paused so that it doesn't get too close and interfere with the ranging runs that DD III is doing. This was the plan all along.
From CNN:
quote:
Meanwhile, work on two relief wells -- seen as the ultimate solution to the oil disaster -- was suspended.
Wells said work on the first relief well, expected to be completed in August, was delayed while officials prepare for the integrity test out of an abundance of caution. It is possible, though unlikely, that shutting in the well as part of the integrity test could cause the back side of the relief well to be blown out, Wells said.
"It's a good precaution to take at this time," he said. However, the delay will set the relief well progress back by one to two days.
Operations on the second relief well were temporarily suspended at a depth of 15,963 feet "to ensure there is no interference with the first relief well," BP said in a statement Tuesday.
Posted on 7/14/10 at 9:30 am to PJinAtl
Thanks, just making sure. There's been so much disinformation throughout this whole thing that I thought I'd double check.
Posted on 7/14/10 at 9:32 am to nycajun
quote:
Or am I wrongly suggesting that BP is still motivated by the bottom line?
Dude. The idea of them in any way saving this oil for production having anything to do with how they are handling this is crazy talk.
They want this shite closed off and are doing whatver they can to make sure this happens.
Posted on 7/14/10 at 9:47 am to notiger1997
quote:
Dude. The idea of them in any way saving this oil for production having anything to do with how they are handling this is crazy talk.
One would hope. But BP hasn't exactly established a pattern of sacrificing marginal revenue in the interests of safety, the environment, or the niceties of government regulations (such as they are).
This post was edited on 7/14/10 at 9:52 am
Posted on 7/14/10 at 9:54 am to nycajun
no way bp is making any money off the oil coming out of that well.
Posted on 7/14/10 at 9:58 am to diat150
100% correct diat. Profits on everything they collect go to relief efforts. Everything they don't collect they have to pay to clean up. I don't think there's anybody that wants the flow stopped more than BP.
Posted on 7/14/10 at 9:59 am to diat150
quote:
no way bp is making any money off the oil coming out of that well.
quote:
Profits on everything they collect go to relief efforts.
I missed that piece of legislation. Or court order. Or whatever. Or, more bluntly, sez who?
My point (and I admit I'm speculating, and out of an abundance of uncertainty about the facts) is that whatever loss BP is takinghere, and it is monumental, would be reduced by any proceeds from the sale of the oil (or refined products therefrom) if they can cap the well and take oil out through the cap. If they spike it with the relief well, the oil stays in the reservoir until another well gets drilled. If ever.
This post was edited on 7/14/10 at 10:03 am
Posted on 7/14/10 at 10:04 am to nycajun
The recovered oil may be generating some revenue for BP, but there's no way it is a profitable operation.
Posted on 7/14/10 at 10:06 am to White Roach
quote:
The recovered oil may be generating some revenue for BP, but there's no way it is a profitable operation.
Of course not. But losing less is "profitable" in a relative sense.
I don't know. Is the cap an alternative to the relief well, or just an interim step?
Posted on 7/14/10 at 10:08 am to nycajun
Interim
Posted on 7/14/10 at 10:17 am to nycajun
quote:
I missed that piece of legislation. Or court order. Or whatever. Or, more bluntly, sez who?
I'm not sure it would be constitutional to legislate that but IANAL. Anyway, BP announced early on that whatever money they make from collected oil would go toward the relief effort. I can't hunt down a press release right now so you'll either have to take my word for it...or not.
quote:
My point (and I admit I'm speculating, and out of an abundance of uncertainty about the facts) is that whatever loss BP is taking here, and it is monumental, would be reduced by any proceeds from the sale of the oil (or refined products therefrom) if they can cap the well and take oil out through the cap. If they spike it with the relief well, the oil stays in the reservoir until another well gets drilled. If ever.
That's not consistent with their desire to shut in the well. If that were the case, they would have simply put a better (sealing) top hat on it and tried to collect as much as they can. However, that's not what they've done.
I know it's fun to throw out wild speculation but you have to look at what would motivate such behavior and whether that behavior is consistent with their other behavior. In this case, there is no motivation to allow the flow to continue and it's not consistent with other actions they've taken to stop the flow.
Posted on 7/14/10 at 10:33 am to nycajun
Because if when they cap it the back pressure causes another blowout in the relief well you will be yelling...," Why didn't they fricking stop drilling?"
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News