- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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: Gulf Oil Spill surpasses Exxon Valdez Today!!
Posted on 5/3/10 at 11:27 pm to baytiger
Posted on 5/3/10 at 11:27 pm to baytiger
quote:
sheen just magically appears on the ocean surface?
That isn't what i'm saying at all........but when you are pissing 5000ft below the surface it will be dispersed at a larger magnitude than it really is because it has enough distance between its starting point and the surface to break apart. We are talking .5 microns here.
This post was edited on 5/3/10 at 11:30 pm
2
Posted on 5/3/10 at 11:28 pm to L S Usetheforce
quote:
It seems like their math assumes the thickest mess of it is uniform across all contaiminated water.
Which it is not.
Now we talking brother.
Posted on 5/3/10 at 11:28 pm to L S Usetheforce
yeah I misunderstood you. I recognize there's some variability there.
Posted on 5/3/10 at 11:31 pm to baytiger
Where I suspect the biggest problem in terms of overestimation of volume is on the outer fringe were bands are broken up
Posted on 5/3/10 at 11:32 pm to baytiger
I'd trust BP estimates more than the sheen estimates because they actually have an idea of what the casing and well was going to produce per day.
Posted on 5/3/10 at 11:32 pm to L S Usetheforce
they assume variable thicknesses, they just assume the high end of each representation on the flyover map.
Which makes sense, as it is in their best interest to represent a high end estimate of how much oil is leaking.
from their website:
Which makes sense, as it is in their best interest to represent a high end estimate of how much oil is leaking.
from their website:
Posted on 5/3/10 at 11:33 pm to L S Usetheforce
quote:
I'd trust BP estimates more than the sheen estimates because they actually have an idea of what the casing and well was going to produce per day.
I really wish they'd release that data for fact checking and peer review though.
Posted on 5/3/10 at 11:34 pm to Volvagia
One thing that I do take from this is how contained it is.
Seems like this is more an issue of contamination rather than a ocean of death like EV.
The vast majority of the killer oil is in a small area. When folks said the oil hit the coast, they were referring to a slight, rainbow sheen to the water.
Seems like this is more an issue of contamination rather than a ocean of death like EV.
The vast majority of the killer oil is in a small area. When folks said the oil hit the coast, they were referring to a slight, rainbow sheen to the water.
Posted on 5/3/10 at 11:35 pm to Volvagia
Yeah. Thankfully, Louisiana oil is better than Alaska oil 
Posted on 5/3/10 at 11:36 pm to baytiger
quote:
really wish they'd release that data for fact checking and peer review though.
I'd assume it isn't in their best interest but my godfather is a Company man for an anadarko rig marco polo which is close to this rig and he told me if they were getting 25000 barrels a day from that wellhead they wouldn't have been cementing off and letting another rig come do the production.
This post was edited on 5/3/10 at 11:40 pm
Posted on 5/4/10 at 12:06 am to baytiger
quote:
baytiger
Don't mean to hijack the thread, but is this going to mess with any of the buoys? ADCPs? I see 42872 has been disestablished...
Posted on 5/4/10 at 12:13 am to Bread Orgeron
not really, I don't think. I've been off for the past few days though so I don't know about any new developments.
Kinda interesting that we got both BURL1 and 42040 up and running within the last 6 months, just in time for this though
Kinda interesting that we got both BURL1 and 42040 up and running within the last 6 months, just in time for this though
Posted on 5/4/10 at 12:18 am to baytiger
Wow yeah I see 42040 was re-established 4/1/2010. Good timing
Posted on 5/4/10 at 12:24 am to Bread Orgeron
just wondering, are you coming over again this summer?
Posted on 5/4/10 at 12:36 am to baytiger
Well I asked Dick back in December if there were any openings and he said with budget cuts there weren't. I just assumed that would be the case this summer, so I didn't really contact him. Kinda wish I would have but it's too late now I'm sure.
Also, I heard there was a new director out there. Was that one lady just an interim?
Also, I heard there was a new director out there. Was that one lady just an interim?
Posted on 5/4/10 at 12:38 am to Bread Orgeron
Yeah.
Posted on 5/4/10 at 8:24 am to davidsheroes
You call can fight all day long about the number of gallons leaking, but due to wear this spill is located and how vast the area it is leaking into, it will never be near the disaster that the Valdez was. I am sure it sounds fun and gives the press a hard on to say these things, but the Valdez leaked heavy crude oil directly into a small bay and it completely covered the whole area in a sludge.
Posted on 5/4/10 at 2:32 pm to L S Usetheforce
quote:
I'd assume it isn't in their best interest but my godfather is a Company man for an anadarko rig marco polo which is close to this rig and he told me if they were getting 25000 barrels a day from that wellhead they wouldn't have been cementing off and letting another rig come do the production.
Not true. it's one thing to make a discovery, it's another thing to do everything necessary to produce it.
first, the completion has to be planned and equipment sourced. then the appropriate subsea infrastructure has to be installed as well. securing the equipment is one issue, then finding slots on rig schedules and installation vessels is another. there's not that many vessels like this in the world, and some times you just have to get in line.
there's a huge amount of money involved in doing this work, and it just doesn't make sense for a company to spend it all up front. the average success rate for exploraiton wells is about 10%. so you really have to explore, see what you have, establish whether it's commercial, then start spending the money to put it on production.
also, all of this has to be approved by the MMS.
Posted on 5/4/10 at 2:41 pm to oilfieldtiger
quote:
I'd assume it isn't in their best interest but my godfather is a Company man for an anadarko rig marco polo which is close to this rig and he told me if they were getting 25000 barrels a day from that wellhead they wouldn't have been cementing off and letting another rig come do the production.
This makes no sense.
Posted on 5/4/10 at 2:46 pm to lsugradman
This was a drilling rig, not a production platform. They had just made a discovery and were temporarily abandoning the well in order to evaluate the results and decide if they want to want to come back at a later date and fully develop the field. Drilling this well probably cost in the $100-200 million range. Developing a field can cost in the 1-2 billion range. So there is serious evaluation that needs to take place to determine if a discovery if commercially viable. Odds are, this one was. This rig suspends the well so that when it its time to develop the field, the platform can tie back into the well and re-enter it to put in on production.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News