BP Told To Pay For Oil Spill

Thats another Story
3rd May 2010, 09:59
is this going to put the price of fuel up?

Billieboy
3rd May 2010, 10:08
Well fancy that! I said there was a BOP problem just after she sank, then it was leaking about 1500tons per day! I see that the booms were fairly quickly deployed, but the was still a big time delay before major assets were put into action.

I seem to remember that KPC had a major share holding in BP at one time, I wonder if they still do?

Thats another Story
3rd May 2010, 10:19
what if there was a hurricane that whiped the oil onto the mainland farmland? are they drilling to deep for oil?

Billieboy
3rd May 2010, 10:31
What's Deep John? Sea bed is 5000feet, today's equipment can do it, it's the BOP stack that's the problem, it should have operated, but didn't!

Big problem is that the North Sea also has lots of BOP stacks which have, as yet, not had to operate in anger!

Thats another Story
3rd May 2010, 10:41
billieboy as i know very little about drilling for oil can it be stoped at the well head mybe some of the oil workers on the site can answer please thanks john.

Supergoods
3rd May 2010, 11:04
I don't think the water depth is the major issue here.

There are various methods of operating the sea bed BOP's and I do not know what the system here is/was.

Its very doubtful that too much will be made public on this, however the sunk rig and the riser are now on the sea bed and may have caused problems at the BOP's when what was vertical became horizontal.

Usually the riser is the weak link and would fail first, however I believe there is some pipe in the wellhead which will require the pipe to be sheared and before the rams can seal the well.

The hurricane season starts June 1st so there should be time to drill a diversion well from close by if the BOP cannot be closed externally.

Ultimately the question is why the well flowing was not detected and appropriate action taken and sadly the people who may have been able to answer this question lost their lives.

Drilling in this, and greater, depths are regularly carried out in the Gulf of Mexico and have been for the last tweny years, without major incidents.

Most of the North Sea is much shallower and the environment is the greater risk.

A lot of political hot air will come out of this, the great majority of which will be agenda driven and of little objective value.

Ian

Thats another Story
3rd May 2010, 11:08
thanks for that supergoods(Thumb)

stevie-w
3rd May 2010, 19:47
is this going to put the price of fuel up?

No doubt that it will have some effect on the oil price although more in the way of supply/demand and future restrictions by the US Government on offshore drilling.

On an aside there was an interview with a local fisherman who balanced the fact that the oil spill may cost his business dear, with the fact that his vessel needed diesel to run...

Don Matheson
4th May 2010, 14:24
John The BOP should have operated and there are several ways to prevent oil leaking from the casing, but sometimes it depends what pipe is in the hole.
If there is drill pipe in the hole and the pipe joints are in line with the rams (which close the well) they will not operate. Drillers who know where the joints are all the time will normally lift off from the bottom to a section of the pipe where a special set of rams can close and cut through the pipe. The pipe then drops down into the hole and the space created allows the blind rams to close thus closing off the hole. Hole in this case meaning the cased well where the BOP is sitting. The BOP also has a type of bladder which closes over and if there is some obstruction in the hole should close round it thus greatly reducing the flow of oil.
If however there was an explosion around the drill floor which seems likely at this time, the driller may not have been able to operate the rams due to his own condition. If the casing was still connected to the rig when she went over the casing and pipe would have gone over and bent thus making it very difficult to close anything. It all depends on the original operation being carried out when the explosion occurred and I think it would be better to await Transoceans initial findings as to what went wrong.
I believe there is a mechanical valve on the BOP suitable for an ROV to operate but if the rig has gone over on top of it it would be inaccessible to the ROV.
BP are not actually responsible for this disaster as they are the charterers of the rig not the owner. The rig was working to Transoceans methods with their own crew following their own method statements. Any new job carried out on a Transocean rig would have been discussed prior to start of shift or by the driller or toolpusher prior to starting the job.
Transocean are a very large company and very experienced in Deep Water Drilling with some of their rigs being equipped for 10,000 ft of water. Trust me when the BOP was installed at the working depth it would have been tested prior to work starting.
I will try and chase up some more information on this situation for you.

Don

Billieboy
4th May 2010, 14:40
Thanks, Don and Supergoods, very enlightening.

AncientBrit
4th May 2010, 16:28
I heard mutterings that Haliburton was involved in some fashion with the equipment that failed. For those in Europe and unfamiliar, The Vice President in the Bush admin, Cheney, was to divest himself of any controlling function of Haliburton when he became VP. Of course when Haliburton went on to scoop contacts left right and centre at grossly exaggerated rates for poor service questions were asked, but no real answers released.
Given the politican condition of the US at this moment. you can bet the farm on there being every effort being made to connect "Tricky Dicky" to this disaster.

Thats another Story
4th May 2010, 16:40
John The BOP should have operated and there are several ways to prevent oil leaking from the casing, but sometimes it depends what pipe is in the hole.
If there is drill pipe in the hole and the pipe joints are in line with the rams (which close the well) they will not operate. Drillers who know where the joints are all the time will normally lift off from the bottom to a section of the pipe where a special set of rams can close and cut through the pipe. The pipe then drops down into the hole and the space created allows the blind rams to close thus closing off the hole. Hole in this case meaning the cased well where the BOP is sitting. The BOP also has a type of bladder which closes over and if there is some obstruction in the hole should close round it thus greatly reducing the flow of oil.
If however there was an explosion around the drill floor which seems likely at this time, the driller may not have been able to operate the rams due to his own condition. If the casing was still connected to the rig when she went over the casing and pipe would have gone over and bent thus making it very difficult to close anything. It all depends on the original operation being carried out when the explosion occurred and I think it would be better to await Transoceans initial findings as to what went wrong.
I believe there is a mechanical valve on the BOP suitable for an ROV to operate but if the rig has gone over on top of it it would be inaccessible to the ROV.
BP are not actually responsible for this disaster as they are the charterers of the rig not the owner. The rig was working to Transoceans methods with their own crew following their own method statements. Any new job carried out on a Transocean rig would have been discussed prior to start of shift or by the driller or toolpusher prior to starting the job.
Transocean are a very large company and very experienced in Deep Water Drilling with some of their rigs being equipped for 10,000 ft of water. Trust me when the BOP was installed at the working depth it would have been tested prior to work starting.
I will try and chase up some more information on this situation for you.

Don

Thanks for that don{ shows your never to old to learn}(Thumb)

Don Matheson
4th May 2010, 17:09
No problem John, just hope it explains some of the problems that may exist.
Ancient Brit, dont see what Halliburton would have to do with this. Their biggest task on an oil rig is as cementers and I dont remember them having much to do with down hole equipment.

Just heard BP say its costing them M4 a day for the cleanup and continue to say the problem is Transoceans not theirs.
Just thinking Venice La. is on TV a lot just now regarding the spill. Last time I was in Venice it was to go on board a Transocean Semi.

On the brighter side one of the Americans that turned up had been told by telephone to come to his office as he was going to Venice, his wife kitted him out in all new gear with new bag and everything. She didnt want her husband going to Italy wearing old gear.

Don

John Campbell
4th May 2010, 19:31
I came accross this info a few moments ago - it explains a lot

http://www.drillingahead.com/forum/topics/transocean-deepwater-horizon-1

Best Regards
JC

Supergoods
5th May 2010, 07:27
Ancient Brit, dont see what Halliburton would have to do with this. Their biggest task on an oil rig is as cementers and I dont remember them having much to do with down hole equipment.

Don

My information, confirmed elsewhere on the web, was that cementing in the well had recently been done, so, if Halliburton was the cement contractor, there may be something to this.

Not really anything to get the old Dick Cheney tirade started, even though I don't care for him myself

Ian

Don Matheson
5th May 2010, 10:51
Supergoods

You are correct, they had recently set some cement I believe in readiness for abandoning the well which had proved a good well. The upper plug had not been set and it seems some of the cement may not have completely set or may have been porous but this at the moment is unconfirmed. Yes Halliburton were the cementers but that is their main job so dont think you can put it down to Dick as he has probably never seen cement.
Lot has been said about the gas coming up the well but I have worked on High Pressure High Temperature wells and everyone had to go to school for these wells. Main concern was that the gas speed as it comes up increases and is reaching amazing speeds when it reaches the surface.
Imagine this if you will, everyone on the drill floor is busy preparing for the next task, they are using the diverter and the fluids are going to the shaker house. The shaker house is suddenly filled with gas and catches fire although the shaker house is an explosion proof area for electrical equipment. You now have a massive fire, under the rig floor and in seconds it has taken the lives of the drill crew. Heat is damaging the control system for the BOP and as no one with any experience can get near the controls the rig is lost right from the start
A horrible thought but unfortunately a possible one.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
5th May 2010, 13:26
Thanks for a very informative thread.

A very nasty one. Lucky (and doubtless thanks to good training) the loss of life was not worse

Is there any "mileage" in the argument, seen in the Press, that an accoustically activated BOP such as is required in Norway would have made a difference, here? Would probably not have saved the rig and could it have sheared the pipe with the drill string in it?

Don Matheson
5th May 2010, 15:20
Finally some good news, just heard on the radio that they have capped the first of the leaks. Nothing explaining how this would have been done, perhaps using the funnel they have discussed which would allow the oil to be floated to the surface and be pumped into a barge.

Andrew Dont know it this accoustically operated BOP would operate in this situation. If there is something in the BOP the normal way is for the Pipe, possibly a cement stinger, would be raised to a clear spot away from any connections. The shear rams are then closed which cuts through the pipe, the pipe would drop down and the blind rams would close in this space and close off the well flow.
If however there is something stuck in the BOP then no amount of operating will stop the flow.
Its a good idea but I dont think it would help in every situation

Don

Andrew Craig-Bennett
5th May 2010, 16:49
Thanks, Don.

That's what I was suspecting - that really nothing was going to work, in this specific situation.

Your graphic account of high pressure gas accelerating up the pipe is most illuminating.

(I never got closer to a rig than the deck of a Swire Pacific Offshore AHTS, and that was a quarter of a century ago! But I do remember a series of photos that someone passed round of a rig sinking due to a blowout without fire - aeration of the sea due to escaping gas - very scary sight!)

Peter B
5th May 2010, 17:15
.......
BP are not actually responsible for this disaster as they are the charterers of the rig not the owner. The rig was working to Transoceans methods with their own crew following their own method statements. Any new job carried out on a Transocean rig would have been discussed prior to start of shift or by the driller or toolpusher prior to starting the job.
Transocean are a very large company and very experienced in Deep Water Drilling with some of their rigs being equipped for 10,000 ft of water. Trust me when the BOP was installed at the working depth it would have been tested prior to work starting.....
Don, thank you for this insight. I have seen US commentators hinting that this disaster would not have happened if only US flagged rigs with US crews were allowed to operate in the US Economic Zone (200 miles offshore, I believe).
I have nothing to say against the quality of US flagged rigs or the skills of US personnel, but it seems scaringly naive that the old "we are the best in the world" dogma still finds its way to the surface (pun intended).
As I understand you, Transocean is not known to be inferior by any means. Am I right?

Andrew Craig-Bennett
5th May 2010, 17:41
Lessee now...

http://www.deepwater.com/fw/main/Deepwater-Horizon-56C16.html?LayoutID=17

The Deepwater Horizon was flying Cayman Islands flag but was owned by Transocean, who were formed from the mergers of American firms and are quoted on the New York Stock Exchange.

The semisub rig was built to a Reading and Bates (American) design, was classed with the American Bureau of Shipping and seems to have been carrying a lot of American crew and operating to US offshore safety rules.

Nope, can't see any US connection there whatsoever.

Don Matheson
5th May 2010, 19:29
Transocean have a huge fleet and indeed have around 23 rigs all capable of drilling in 7500 ft or more. They are based in Houston Tx. and have grown from I believe Sonat who then bought and amalgamated with numerous large companies but are a very professional company indeed. Their big Deepwater rigs are from Transocean, Global Marine, Santa Fe, Sonat, Sedco Forex All good companies who spare very little in looking after the big rigs.
Based in Houston with a makeup of top American and one very large French companies it goes without saying that the crews in the GOM are local American and will have American Toolpushers. They will be regularly inspected by the USCG amd will have to comply with the standards of American industry so for goodness sake dont think they will be American.
Have been on board Transocean rigs in the GOM and it was strange all these americans and two Scots telling them where they were going wrong.
As for it not have happening had there been Americans there, its an American company and in Lousiana they will have their own crews. Its a bit like the commentator who said if Steven Hawkins had been British the NHS would have killed him. Mr Hawkins is of course British and says he owes his life to the NHS. Reminds me of a strange woman from Alaska who said if America got a health plan like the NHS they would kill all the handicapped children.
The rig is or was a fifth generation drilling rig and as such is a rather advanced drilling rig, and had recently discovered a huge oil field which is a monster.
Forgive my rambling

Don

davetodd
5th May 2010, 22:49
Carry on rambling Don.
It is intelligent rambling based on experience.(Applause)
Best Regards
Dave.
p.s. hope you are fully recovered.

Don Matheson
6th May 2010, 16:53
Dave Nice to hear from you again, my illness is getting easier but will never be cured as far as I can see. Not to worry.

The ramblings are as you say based on experience and I have actually been on board around 25 of the rigs now owned by Transocean.
I also have some information which will never be put on here due to it leading of an end to peoples career if it was ever put together. If you know what I mean!


Don

davetodd
6th May 2010, 17:03
Dave Nice to hear from you again, my illness is getting easier but will never be cured as far as I can see. Not to worry.

The ramblings are as you say based on experience and I have actually been on board around 25 of the rigs now owned by Transocean.
I also have some information which will never be put on here due to it leading of an end to peoples career if it was ever put together. If you know what I mean!


Don
Say no more!
Best wishes Don.
Dave

Satanic Mechanic
6th May 2010, 18:00
the T shirts are good though

Don Matheson
6th May 2010, 19:17
More information on which may help provide some update on this disaster.
Much is being made on the large structure being shipped out to try and cover the leak and allow the oil to be brought to the surface under controlled conditions and allow the oil to be pumped ashore by ship.
It was reported today that this has never been done before but I believe it has been carried out on a leak in the Yucatan but perhaps the depth is the problem here. Dont think it will be easy trying to position then land something like this when the target is 5000 ft. below the ship or crane controlling it.
God willing it works as it could bring some relief to the fishermen of the Gulf.
Another rig is on the way to drill a relief well which is in itself not an easy job as the drill string and bit has to be steered to a pipe which at the most is around 36 inches wide.
The rig is the Development Driller 111 which is a large new Transocean rig which is capable of drilling in 7500ft. I am pretty sure Transocean will have a lot of their very best men on her to supervise the operation.
I wish them well.

Don

Mike S
7th May 2010, 09:47
This was achieved just recently in the Timor Sea. Very shallow water in comparison however it took a few stabs to get the pipe.

forthbridge
4th January 2011, 16:29
Members may be interested in this

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/26/us/26spill.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&src=twrhp

Hamish Mackintosh
4th January 2011, 19:11
I wonder What years down the road, just how much it will cost BP, when one looks at the pittance Exonn had to pay,after all the oil had cleared, and the legal begals were done

Pat Kennedy
4th January 2011, 20:17
Members may be interested in this

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/26/us/26spill.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&src=twrhp
A very vivid account which seems to place most, if not all of the blame on the crew of the rig, and on the emergency procedures in place.
Nowhere does it nail BP as being in anyway to blame, although it does state several times that BP were putting pressure on the rig to get the job done quickly, nothing unusual there.
It is, however, a newspaper report, and is not an objective account.

Supergoods
4th January 2011, 22:18
A not unheard of scenario, just far worse consequences than the usual interdepartmental strife on a drilling rig.
I was talking to someone who had experienced a small fire on a rig and had a 30% turnout for the fire team with the rest at the lifeboats
The inter-relationship between the Captain, the Company Man, the Toolpusher, the shore management etc. etc. are often more conflict than cooperation.
I was glad to be out of it after 24 years.

Billieboy
5th January 2011, 09:45
The initial problem was down hole, cementation of casing and mud weight, before anyone starts talking about the BOP stack. Then comes the rig, where there was NO possible action to take after the initial well kick.

All they could do was to get off the rig as fast as possible.

Supergoods
5th January 2011, 12:47
Whatever the cause of the initial kick, remember a kick is not a blow out, all was not lost at that stage.
What was needed was early recognition that there was a kick and a very quick recognition that it was beyond control.
Then unlatch from the beast and get up wind of the gas cloud.
The authority to order the disconnect appears to have been confused and the "We can control this" mentality may have lost valuable time.
But that's sufficient speculation on what could have been done to save the rig, although probably not avoided the blow out itself.

RayJordandpo
5th January 2011, 18:12
A not unheard of scenario, just far worse consequences than the usual interdepartmental strife on a drilling rig.
I was talking to someone who had experienced a small fire on a rig and had a 30% turnout for the fire team with the rest at the lifeboats
The inter-relationship between the Captain, the Company Man, the Toolpusher, the shore management etc. etc. are often more conflict than cooperation.
I was glad to be out of it after 24 years.

How right you are.
I spent eight years on drilling rigs including contracts with BP.
I've seen a guy with a broken ankle "sneaked" onto a helicopter so the company man didn't see him in case it affected our safety bonus. Keep drilling at all costs, nothing must stop that drill bit turning.

D Sutton
5th January 2011, 21:14
How right you are.
I spent eight years on drilling rigs including contracts with BP.
I've seen a guy with a broken ankle "sneaked" onto a helicopter so the company man didn't see him in case it affected our safety bonus. Keep drilling at all costs, nothing must stop that drill bit turning.

And by not reporting it, you were an active part of that culture.

RayJordandpo
5th January 2011, 23:16
Yes I was indeed guilty of that, not that it would have made a scrap of difference except costing me my job. Can I ask you if you have ever worked in the offshore oil industry?. I take it that yourself as a builder report every act you witness or hear about that may be adjudged not totally safe or above board?

NoR
6th January 2011, 14:43
It's funny how people freeze when faced with a situation for which they have trained but not actually experienced. In 1969(ish) I was 3rd Mate (or 3/O in RFA speak) on RFA Black Ranger. One evening we were doing a RAS on a frigate (can't remember which one). Nice late summer evening good weather everything going smoothly...when our (steam driven)steering gear failed. I was OOW when the QM said something like 'she's not steering', he was right the helm had stuck about 2 degrees to stbd if I recall correctly. I immediately told the Old Man who was on the bridge wing, and we swung into the well rehearsed emergency breakaway drill. Well we did, the Frigate didn't her crew froze and just stared at us. Our old man grabbed his Pye Megaphone and bawled yes it's for real plus a few expletives. Only then the the naval crew close the hose end valve and break the frangible spool. If our rudder had jammed anywhere else but close to midships it would have been much more exiting.

I read the NYT report as well ...pretty depressing reading.

callpor
6th January 2011, 16:10
I see that the US Commission investigating the incident released Chapter 4 of their report earlier today which can be found at http://www.oilspillcommission.gov/. The full report is to be published on January 11, 2011. You will note that the commission concluded that the root cause is a systemic failure of management in all three companies, BP, Halliburton and Transocean.

D Sutton
6th January 2011, 20:11
Yes I was indeed guilty of that, not that it would have made a scrap of difference except costing me my job. Can I ask you if you have ever worked in the offshore oil industry?. I take it that yourself as a builder report every act you witness or hear about that may be adjudged not totally safe or above board?

I have not worked in the offshore rig industry.

As an employer I take safe working practises seriously as well as the safety and security of my employees. I had safety drummed into me as an apprentice and have always found that a safe site runs better than one where people cut corners.
I will admit, I had no problem sacking 2 people who thought that the pursuit of greater wealth for themselves was fine if it meant that others may be endangered.
I suppose that would make me the company man?

I don't mean to sound harsh, but I have seen what happens and had to pick up pieces from when when someone has touched 25Kv (smells awful), stood in front of a train (twice) and fell from a great height. So when I started my own company I have made sure that safe working practises are adhered to.

On the topic of this thread I do think the Americans are out to screw BP as it may well play well with home politics. . . . . .or is that the cynic in me?

Supergoods
7th January 2011, 01:10
If I recall, the make up of the panel for the enquiry was somewhat unbalanced in that there was no one from the industry on it.

The safety culture is alive and well in the oil field and is most company's published philosophy.

Unfortunately it is administered by a beaurocracy that has little experience of reality or the practical application of it.

The development of safety has generated a group of people who are full of theory but no practical experience.

The situation in the present incident was so complex that the management of it was far outside the capability of the safety practitioners either in the offices or on board the rig.

Ian

callpor
7th January 2011, 16:59
If I recall, the make up of the panel for the enquiry was somewhat unbalanced in that there was no one from the industry on it.

The safety culture is alive and well in the oil field and is most company's published philosophy.

Unfortunately it is administered by a beaurocracy that has little experience of reality or the practical application of it.

The development of safety has generated a group of people who are full of theory but no practical experience.

The situation in the present incident was so complex that the management of it was far outside the capability of the safety practitioners either in the offices or on board the rig.

Ian

Ian, Regardless of the make-up of the panel, their report will carry a lot of weight. If your last sentence is proved correct then it was a recipe for disaster. The Lawyers (as usual) are going to make a fortune out of this during the next several years. Chris

Jon Vincent
9th January 2011, 00:16
Callpor, I believe you said several years, I have news for you they hav'nt finsihed with the "Exxon Valdes" so the forecatsed end of BP is a little premature. Also today the there was am unfortunate shooting in Arizona, the attention will switch to there as our attorney general has been dispatched to make sure the shooters rights are not violated. Remember the inquiry was run by Lawyers and politicians here are normally Lawyers failed.

GWB
9th January 2011, 01:01
Just read that the blame for the Deepwater Horizon Disaster must be shared,
between the Oil company, Contractors and Regulators. Read more here
http://www.theengineer.co.uk/1006718.article?cmpid=TE01P&cmptype=newsletter&cmpdate=070111&email=true

GWB

Don Matheson
9th January 2011, 14:44
Been trying to add to this for several days so here goes now. The latest report will be out tomorrow and will be the one ( right or wrong) that the US Government will act on.
The article by the NY Times was pretty good but please remember it was written by a journalist with no experience or knowledge of the equipment he was writing about. Good article thouigh as it gives members who read it a better understanding of events.
Several things come to mind but the major cause seems to be a failure of the BOP system including the Lower Marine Riser. Had that closed it would have been a kick, no more and would have been contained and overcome. Another is the failure of anyone to be responsible for the EDS ( Emergency Disconnect) and indeed to activate it until far to late when it failed to operate. Another was the explosion in the engine room of the two running engines and finally although first in priority, was the failure to recognise the accelerating gas in the well. Had that been recognised the well could have been shut down and disaster averted.
Having worked on High Pressure High Temperature ( HPHT) wells I believe I can add a little to explain some of this.
We trained for these wells, everyone who operated on or around the drill floor had to attend and daily the ongoing situation was discussed. I see no reason why Transocean would do any different. As I mentioned on the first main thread on this I have been involved with Transocean and have indeed been onboard lots of their vessels. I do however know some of their safety procedures and dont believe this was not discussed.
The BOP failure was in my mind perhaps caused by the first explosion taking the drillers shack out and killing the driller making his unable to operate his shutdowns but the report shows that he did indeed attempt to shutdown the well. Perhaps the explosion took away the equipment to operate the shutdown.
This would be explained by the failure of the vents to the engine room to shut and for the fans to stop. The engines should have been shut down by the Rig Savers but again they failed. The rigsaver is a flap device fitted in the air intake of any rig engine which shuts when the engine overspeeds and is disigned to prevent engines running on gas and overspeeding followed by explosion. Have never seen a rigsaver on a Transocean rig fail to operate and I have tested lots.
I believe the rig was trying to do quite a few things at the same time but I know that if we were working a HPHT well there was always someone on the rig floor visualy watching the well condition as we did not believe all the instruments fitted to the well. Perhaps that one guy could have made a difference.
Failure to divert the rising mud/gas to the diverter and into the sea or out the derrick vent. The speed of the gas could have surprised everyone as this flow is frightenly fast and accelerates as it rises in the well.
The main fadeepwater horizon BOPlt in the oil spill as opposed to the rig disaster was that the rig had not disconnected (ESD) before it went over. The ESD would have disconnected from the well and the drill pipe/casing would not have bent at right angles thus preventing any re-entry and leading to side entry drilling much lower down and months later.

Hope this rather long winded post will help explain some of my thoughts on this disaster.
I do believe that the BOP still sits ashore and if you google it you may get some idea of the size and equipment is being discussed. Google deepwater horizon BOP That should bring up some good photos.

Forgive my ramblings
Don

Billieboy
10th January 2011, 09:27
Definitely NOT ramblings Don, I understood just about all of what you've written on this thread.

To me it looks like the safety book and systems will have to be re-written, again, as they were after The Norwegian floating rig capsized and the Piper Alpha explosion.

It's very painful to say it, but it's only loss of life that gets Govt. regulations re-written, after safety systems have failed.

Don Matheson
10th January 2011, 11:46
Billieboy, there were definately ramblings on this part. Only excuse is my illness tires me out very very quickly so I should not make long posts
"The main fadeepwater horizon BOPlt in the oil spill as opposed to the rig disaster was that the rig had not disconnected (ESD) before it went over. The ESD would have disconnected from the well and the drill pipe/casing would not have bent at right angles thus preventing any re-entry and leading to side entry drilling much lower down and months later. "
This should have read something like " The main fault with the BOP which caused the continual spill was that after the failure to disconnect, the rig went over taking the casing/drillpipe with her. This bent the top of the well which prevented re-entry to the well and hampered the attempts to kill the flowing well.
Had the BOP been sitting upright even with trash inside it, re-entry would have been much more straightforward than happened.
There still seems to be something that the inquiry is failing to find in the sequence of events.
How come so many alarms and shutdowns failed to operate before the explosion? After the explosion I can understand, but before it does not make sense, one or two perhaps but not all of them!

Hope this makes a wee bit more sense.
Don

Billieboy
10th January 2011, 19:25
IMHO the problem with the failure of alarms and auto cut-outs on the rig immediately prior to the gas explosion, indicates that there was more than "A Management Problem", on the rig.

Once again, safety systems are only as good, as the people who install and operate them.