Oil and Water don't mix

[yabadabapal]

THIS may enlighten us all, a little more, on what exactly BP is actually doing.

 

Got this link from a friend of mine in the oil bidness.

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks Phil. Really interesting.

[Bill_Walker]

THIS may enlighten us all, a little more, on what exactly BP is actually doing.

 

Got this link from a friend of mine in the oil bidness.

 

 

 

 

Looks like it'll tell us the things that BP wants us to believe they're doing. I don't trust 'em to tell the truth at this point.

[motoguy128]

Was his performance any different than previous presidents in similar catastophes?

 

If a president is performing poorly, why would the actions of a predecessor matter? Would it somehow change the fact that he is performing poorly?

 

Only if your expectations for the position are based on previous individuals in the same position.

 

I honestly find that the best demonstrations of leadership in a crisis usually come from lower level managers. Upper management is usually occupied with lots of other issues unrelated to responding to the actual problem.

[Shaman97]

Unfortunately Bill, we don't have much choice.

 

The oil industry has all the tools that can plug this type of problem, the Feds don't. Katrina is a case in contrast - FEMA, the Red Cross, and other Federal agencies are setup to handle the types of catastrophe that Katrina was. Deepwater Horizon presents a problem in that we (the Feds) are relying on the oil companies to come through on their promises of being able to contain these types of problems. We saw that with Exxon Valdez, they (the oil companies) did not have the resources available that they said they did. Since then, all the oil companies have laid claim to the ability to contain any spill they may have with their rigs; none have, and there hasn't been any consequence for them to change. Maybe this will cause the oil companies to modify their emergency control procedures.

 

One way would be to have unannounced mock oil spills...a 'Fire Drill' as it were. Id the companies don't respond, heap large fines on them until they do.

 

Also there was an article today that NOAA has determined that 2010 is going to be the worse hurricane season since 2005. That could push the underwater dispersed oil deep into the many pristine wet lands.

 

Not only the marshlands, but with the approaching hurricane season comes with it thje likelihood the oil will get sucked up by the storms, and deposited inland by the winds and rains.

 

Nice.

[yabadabapal]

And another item to add to the list of concerns is that 85% of all the moisture in the atmosphere comes from the ocean. The probability of chemically effected rainfall via stagnant and moving storms deserves some consideration. Another aspect of the migration of chemical dispersants and the chemicals in oil will be from migrating bird flocks that have been infected in the gulf. Had BP invested its integrity and resources to make sure the BOP was functional, as they seem to be doing now although a bit late to ask for respect, we might not have had this problem. But, as hard as I try, I do stupid things as well and lessons must be applied to make sure we dont repeat the same mistakes again. The difference is that when I make mistakes, I pay for them. When BP makes mistakes, we all pay for them.

[Paul Mihalka]

From CNN news email: -- BP's top official upgrades impact of Gulf oil spill from "very modest" to "environmental catastrophe."

 

Really? Don't say...

[Ken H.]

THIS may enlighten us all, a little more, on what exactly BP is actually doing.

When I watch that video, the only thing I see is a new clarity of how incredibly complex and foolhardy offshore drilling is in the first place. This is no solution for anything.

 

I read this a few weeks ago (I subscribe to the magazine, which BTW I highly recommend) and found it incredibly interesting. An (apparent) energy solution right before our eyes - Boiling Hot

 

[Selden]

Looks like it'll tell us the things that BP wants us to believe they're doing. I don't trust 'em to tell the truth at this point.

Jay Leno: "Well, folks, here's the latest update. I guess this is good news.... BP officials say the 'top kill' plan is working. The bad news -- BP officials are a bunch of lying weasels."

 

As of a few minutes ago, they supposedly have stopped the flow, but I haven't yet seen any live video confirmation.

[Paul Mihalka]

"When I watch that video, the only thing I see is a new clarity of how incredibly complex and foolhardy offshore drilling is in the first place. This is no solution for anything"

 

Ken, if you imply that ofshore drilling should be stopped and the concept abandoned, I disagree with you (rare).

This catastrophy may be the Chernobyl of offshore drilling. Chernobyl was a catastrophy in nuclear power generation. It did not mean that we have to abandon nuclear power. It meant that we have to do it better - much better.

[Selden]

Chernobyl is an apt comparison, as workers were killed during the accident, and a large swathe of Ukraine was rendered uninhabitable (but is recovering rapidly). Radiation causes cancer; so do hydrocarbons. If we could send 17 Apollo missions to the moon and back, we can develop procedures to ensure that the risk of future catastrophes like this one is minimized -- but never completely eliminated (only a politican would say "never happen again").

 

And perhaps that is the best possible outcome from this disaster.

[Selden]

David Brooks has written one of the most sensible commentaries I have read to date: Drilling for Certainty.

[Ken H.]

Ken, if you imply that ofshore drilling should be stopped and the concept abandoned, I disagree with you (rare).

I think this latest mess should be a wake up call in general that the use of hydrocarbons - coal, oil (in it’s various refined products) and natural gas as the source of energy for mankind’s advancement is fraught with peril. Not the least of which is in a whole host of ways we are poisoning the planet, and as a result ourselves. Mass air, ground and now water pollution, what’s left to ruin?

 

Especially when there exist better ways. Solar, wind, geothermal, and to a lesser extent nuclear. We just lack the willpower as a society to abandon cheap and easy for better but harder.

[yabadabapal]

David Brooks has written one of the most sensible commentaries I have read to date: Drilling for Certainty.

 

Great article, thanks!

[Ken H.]

David Brooks has written one of the most sensible commentaries I have read to date: Drilling for Certainty.

Excellently put. He’s talking about moral hazard.

[Antimatter]

David Brooks has written one of the most sensible commentaries I have read to date: Drilling for Certainty.

Excellently put. He’s talking about moral hazard.

 

His article echo your comment about us trashing the environment and depending on more and more complex technology to keep us one step ahead of results.

[yabadabapal]

Just a quick update on some interesting news. Where is all the news.

Well, Ill tell ya and its interesting. Info says that BP has sent and ordered all department to keep their mouth shut and that all information that could be newsworthy must first be approved via some representation of the major stock holders as certain news events have and most likely will continue to cause cascading and downward stock value per share etc.

[Selden]

Well, BP has given up on top kill/junk shot, and will now try to put a small cap atop the broken riser to capture most of the outflow. Top kill was never given better than a 70% chance of success, so this isn't a big surprise, but it's a terrible disappointment.

 

BP's description of 300-400 beach cleanup workers on Grand Isle yesterday as having nothing to do with the President's visit strains credibility -- especially since the cleanup crew left as soon as the President was gone. BP didn't start with much credibility, and they are rapidly squandering what little they have left.

 

[Ken H.]

Just a quick update on some interesting news. Where is all the news.

Well, Ill tell ya and its interesting. Info says that BP has sent and ordered all department to keep their mouth shut and that all information that could be newsworthy must first be approved via some representation of the major stock holders as certain news events have and most likely will continue to cause cascading and downward stock value per share etc.

Yeah, at this point they’re not trying to salvage the Gulf, they’re trying to salvage BP.

 

Boo-hoo. Not.

[yabadabapal]

BP you suck. Yes its a no show for the top kill. Its over with that brainless theory. So its finally moving to what they should have done a month aqo. Cut the riser. The one thing that Ive notices is that it appears that every decision BP has made as a means of correcting this problem has been determined not on the effectiveness of the solution but rather the cost, the economics.

 

[ESokoloff]

Well if this were a broken/discharging fire sprinkler you would cap it off.

First you would remove the sprinkler head & then you would screw in a short section (nipple) of pipe with an opened ball valve on the (opposite) end to insure no build up of pressure.

After this pipe was secured you would then merely close the valve.

 

Seams to me that the BOP is substantial enough to allow a similar device to be attached/secured to it.

 

When I saw the 60 min. report a few weeks back I thought....

 

(1) How could they be allowed to drill at those depths if they were not equipped to deal with a worse case scenario.

 

(2) Why was there not a second/redundant rubber seal (around the drill pipe).

I doubt it would have added more then 10k to the cost of the BOP.

 

And last but MOST concerning

(3) Why no interlock on the rubber seal mechanism to prevent the drill pipe from being manipulated when it was deployed/compressed?

 

[motoguy128]

If we could send 17 Apollo missions to the moon and back, we can develop procedures to ensure that the risk of future catastrophes like this one is minimized -- but never completely eliminated (only a politican would say "never happen again").

 

And perhaps that is the best possible outcome from this disaster.

 

Yes, there's a very simple solution to preventing this type of disaster. IF you don't have the proper equipment to seal a broken riser at 5000ft.... then you don't drill at 5000ft.

 

IF you blow-out preventer isn't working properly, you don't drill.

 

Another solution. For every 1000 gallons of oil you spill., you pay $1MM in fines that go into a fund to pay restitution to victims.

 

While there is a active leak and spill, you will not receive any new drilling permits, on land or sea or be issued any new or amended EPA permits to new or existing refineries.

 

 

This is the same way other industries are managed in terms of environmental impact. At my workplace, if you're exceeding your environmental discharge limits, you shut down your process and get it back under control or face a fine. 10 years ago, that wasn't the case.

[John Ranalletta]

Interesting info and pics here

[Selden]

BP you suck. Yes its a no show for the top kill. Its over with that brainless theory. So its finally moving to what they should have done a month aqo. Cut the riser. The one thing that Ive notices is that it appears that every decision BP has made as a means of correcting this problem has been determined not on the effectiveness of the solution but rather the cost, the economics.

I'm no fan of BP, but the top kill attempt must have cost far more than the top hat approach. Drilling mud isn't free. They're working down through a range of solutions; by definition the last one they choose will be the one that worked. 20/20 hindsight won't alter that, and it's in their interest to cap the thing as quickly as possible. I have seen estimates that the reservoir has already been depleted by about 3% -- that, plus the labor and equipment costs, is a huge loss for BP. I think this will be over much quicker than Ixtoc I, but remember that blowout was out of control for almost a year -- and Ixtoc I was in relatively shallow waters, where they could send down divers.

 

[yabadabapal]

 

We are finally on our way to what I hope will seal the majority of the leak although not all of it. After they cut the riser, etc, whatever leaks remain will most likely continue until mid August, for the final relief drill to open the channel.

77 more days if its completed by August 15/2010.

 

 

BP Quote

"In parallel with the ongoing top kill operation, preparations have been made for the possible deployment of the lower marine riser package (LMRP) cap containment system.

 

Deployment would first involve removing the damaged riser from the top of the failed BOP to leave a cleanly-cut pipe at the top of the BOP's LMRP. The cap, a containment device with a sealing grommet, will be connected to a riser from the Discoverer Enterprise drillship, 5,000 feet above on the surface, and placed over the LMRP with the intention of capturing most of the oil and gas flowing from the well.

 

The LMRP cap is already deployed alongside the BOP in readiness for potential deployment. If it is decided to deploy this option, this would be expected to take some three to four days.

 

In addition to these steps, planning is being advanced for deploying, if necessary, a second BOP on top of the original failed BOP"

[Ken H.]

What scares the bejezz out of me at the moment is the coming hurricane season. It’s not unusual for ruminates of a hurricane to travel far north. Can we imagine micro-fine droplets of crude oil and dispersants raining all the way from the coast to Atlanta, GA?

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

David Brooks has written one of the most sensible commentaries I have read to date: Drilling for Certainty.

Excellently put. Hes talking about moral hazard.

 

:confused:

 

Did we read the same article? Moral hazard describes the difference in one's behavior when one is insulated from risk; the article, as I understood it, spoke only of the difficulty in accurately assessing risk.

 

I do not suggest that moral hazard is not an issue in the current oil spoil, only that it wasn't the subject of that article.

 

Interestingly enough, Brooks spoke (for comparison's sake) of the difficulty in assessing the danger of loss-of-life accidents WRT the space shuttle program. But in the opening paragraph of Feynman's contribution to the Rogers Commission Report, Feynman says that the working engineers estimated the risk at 1 in 100, which is remarkably close to the mark: in 132 flights, there have been two loss-of-life accidents.

[Dave McReynolds]

It seems that humans have been remarkably willing to put themselves and others at risk throughout history. The best example I can think of is the first human produced nuclear chain reaction. Was anybody really sure when they did that that it could be controlled? Medicines, products developed through chemistry, plants and animals introduced willy-nilly into new geographical areas, pesticides and insecticides, people seem inclined to do whatever they think they can get away with, and worry about the consequences later. Can anybody think of a situation where a promising new technology was abandoned, absent any regulatory requirements, simply because the developers of the technology thought the risks to the environement were too high?

[ESokoloff]

..... Feynman says that the working engineers estimated the risk at 1 in 100, which is remarkably close to the mark: in 132 flights, there have been two loss-of-life accidents.

 

I'm not sure that 2/3 (accuracy) counts as remarkable.

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

..... Feynman says that the working engineers estimated the risk at 1 in 100, which is remarkably close to the mark: in 132 flights, there have been two loss-of-life accidents.

 

I'm not sure that 2/3 (accuracy) counts as remarkable.

 

For most purposes, engineers are happy if their calculations get them to within 10% of reality. But when it comes to predicting the accident rate of something as complex as the space shuttle program (with all its parts, persons and policies), I don't see a whole lot of difference between "1 in 100" (the engineers' estimate) and "1 in 66" (reality).

[yabadabapal]

I read today, a federal injunction barring BP from burning or disposing of uniforms worn by rescue workers. Many of the workers who have become sick were within a one mile radius from where low flying planes were spraying despersants. I was thinking the feds should create a new policy requiring a 2nd relief channel to accompany the initial well on any new drill sites from this point on. As long as they abide by a second relief channel in full working condition before any oil is brought up through the riser on the same well, some benefits could apply.

Hey, out of curiosity , if we were to create a new drilling standard and set of laws, what would be some things that might be included in the creation of a new set of rules and laws and the consequences of not following the laws.

 

One other question. Could the Federal Govt take control of all USA BP offshore Producing wells until BP and or the revenue from those wells have effected and paid for a total cleanup and economic restitution? 5 years/10 years/50 years

 

[Ken H.]

I was thinking the feds should create a new policy requiring a 2nd relief channel to accompany the initial well on any new drill sites from this point on. As long as they abide by a second relief channel in full working condition before any oil is brought up through the riser on the same well, some benefits could apply.

Actually it wouldn’t be a new regulation. It’s always been there but has been frequently waved. It is still in effect (and enforced) in Canada. Shell recently (pre Gulf incident) applied for a waver for a proposed rig off the shores of eastern Canada and was denied.

[Ken H.]

Ever have your chainsaw bind in a log? Well apparently it can happen to anyone - Link

[Ken H.]

Tony Hayward, “I’d like my life back.” –

 

Yeah well so would 11 others I can think of, and 1000s and 1000s of others whose life has been affected by your grouse, arrogant negligence all in pursuit of your God Dollar.

 

What an a-hole.

 

And people wonder why I think mega-corporations and their CEOs are major evils in the world.

 

Man that guy pisses me off.

 

[Matts_12GS]

Wow, the sound of one hand clapping...

 

 

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

Tony Hayward, Id like my life back.

 

Yeah well so would 11 others I can think of, and 1000s and 1000s of others whose life has been affected by your grouse, arrogant negligence all in pursuit of your God Dollar.

 

What an a-hole.

 

And people wonder why I think mega-corporations and their CEOs are major evils in the world.

 

Man that guy pisses me off.

 

Your outrage arrived a couple of days late; he apologized yesterday for that remark.

 

"I made a hurtful and thoughtless comment on Sunday when I said that 'I wanted my life back,' " Hayward said. "When I read that recently, I was appalled. I apologize, especially to the families of the 11 men who lost their lives in this tragic accident.

 

"Those words don't represent how I feel about this tragedy, and certainly don't represent the hearts of the people of BP -- many of whom live and work in the Gulf -- who are doing everything they can to make things right. My first priority is doing all we can to restore the lives of the people of the Gulf region and their families -- to restore their lives, not mine."

 

 

[Ken H.]

Your outrage arrived a couple of days late; he apologized yesterday for that remark.

Yes I know, an apology, likely written by BP’s PR department, in the most impersonal of mediums – a posting on their web site.

 

BFD.

 

People say what they are truly thinking in their most unscripted moments.

 

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

Yes I know, an apology, likely written by BPs PR department, in the most impersonal of mediums a posting on their web site.

 

BFD.

 

It's not like he's going to call a press conference just to issue an apology for a single remark.

 

 

People say what they are truly thinking in their most unscripted moments.

 

You've never said something, had someone else point out to you that it was rather insensitive, and then thought, "wow, they're right," and then tried in good faith to make amends?

 

You're married, right?

 

Should there never be forgiveness for someone who puts their foot in their mouth?

[MattS]

Should there never be forgiveness for someone who puts their foot in their mouth?

Not when they make more money than you there shouldn't.

[Matts_12GS]

Should there never be forgiveness for someone who puts their foot in their mouth?

Not when they make more money than you there shouldn't.

 

So, your envy of his earnings overrides his potential for typical human shortcomings?

 

Interesting.

[steve.foote]

Should there never be forgiveness for someone who puts their foot in their mouth?

Not when they make more money than you there shouldn't.

 

Matt, you have such a way of getting right to the point.

[Ken H.]

It's not like he's going to call a press conference just to issue an apology for a single remark.

Why not? It would probably be one of the smartest damage control moves he could make.

 

You've never said something, had someone else point out to you that it was rather insensitive, and then thought, "wow, they're right," and then tried in good faith to make amends?

Of course, who hasn't? But is the insensitivity in saying it or thinking it? A lot of things we think should go unsaid. But I still maintain what is said in the most off-cuff manner/situations are truer reflections of what is thought, what the person is really like below the facade. How many people caught in the, "Oh, I shouldn’t have said that" moment actually mean to themselves, "Oh I shouldn’t have thought that"? Very few. We can (maybe) be talked out of our position later, but what is said at the time reflects our true beliefs more.

 

In this case, 'I’m more concerned about me that everything else about this' is the message that cam across from Hayward loud and clear. Official apology not withstanding, I doubt his attitude about that has changed by Wednesday from Sunday. A person's entire persona doesn't change on a dime like that.

 

 

[steve.foote]

Tony Hayward, “I’d like my life back.” –

 

Yeah well so would 11 others I can think of, and 1000s and 1000s of others whose life has been affected by your grouse, arrogant negligence all in pursuit of your God Dollar.

 

What an a-hole.

 

And people wonder why I think mega-corporations and their CEOs are major evils in the world.

 

Man that guy pisses me off.

 

Ken, your feigned outrage is laughable. You don't even know this guy, yet you hate him. In fact, I thought you tolerant and enlighted types were opposed to the idea of hating in the first place.

 

God Dollars? Puuuleeeeeeezzze!! I highly doubt you refuse any of the "God Dollars" your employeer, or the canadian government, sails your way. Can you spell hypocrisy?

 

I'll bet if someone went on a similar rant about our president, that someone would be taken to the woodshed for a little straightening out. It's time to apply the high standards this site is known for to everyone.

[Ken H.]

So, your envy of his earnings overrides his potential for typical human shortcomings?

Matt, time and time again here you come back to the theme that someone’s outrage over, objections to, some subject or another, some actions of some person or organization; boils down to wealth envy. And that’s just plain not true. Some people place a higher value on things said and done in the world than financial wealth. It’s actually what morality is all about.

[Ken H.]

Ken, your feigned outrage is laughable. You don't even know this guy, yet you hate him. In fact, I thought you tolerant and enlighted types were opposed to the idea of hating in the first place.

Why do I have to know somebody personally to think the things he says and does are appalling? The world is full of people any one of us might not agree with/object to. Not knowing them is no excuse.

 

Besides, I never used the word "hate."

 

I'll bet if someone went on a similar rant about our president, that someone would be taken to the woodshed for a little straightening out. It's time to apply the high standards this site is known for to everyone.

So now you advocate we should be able to criticize anyone here, not just politicians? Even I think that's taking MRN a bit too far.

[motoguy128]

Should there never be forgiveness for someone who puts their foot in their mouth?

Not when they make more money than you there shouldn't.

 

More specifically, consider the multiplier at which he makes more money than evne most of thsoe in the upper 10% of incomes in the US. I'd like to see a little more skill at handling public speaking. At this point in his career he should know when to keep his mouth shut. This isn't a middle manager or a low level project engineer.

 

Although it proves a theory of mine... that many CEO's are in their positions as a result of the right series of circumstances throughout their career, not because they are nessesarily the best qualified, or the best person for the job. The ability to navigate the corporate ladder and impress the right people, does not make you the best leader or best spokesperson.

[Selden]

Tony Hayward apologizing on the BP web site is like Al Gore announcing the end of his marriage via e-mail -- I mean, he could at least have used Facebook. It sounds like something from the fake BP-PR twitter feed.

 

An oral apology, before cameras would have been one small good step for Hayward/BP, after a series of horrible gaffes.

 

The umpire who made the bad call last night, causing Armando Galarraga to lose a perfect game had enough decency to go to the locker room after the game and apologize to Galarraga. That was a decent thing to do, and it's a type of behavior that is far too rare.

[yabadabapal]

When I heard and saw Haywards comment "Id like to get my life back", I wasn't surprised. What is interesting about that comment and the timing of it is how so many people can have different perspectives about what he was saying and referring to. What I got from that statement is that he now knows without any uncertainty that he will never get his life back, never again. He is well aware of the criminal investigations and much more that are forthcoming and his statement to me which I carefully listened to and watched carefully was more of an admission of his choices and the inescapable consequences that he knows he will be facing without exception in the coming months. While the banking industry convinced the government that some things are to big to fail, there is no single person that is to big to fall and Hayward knows he is going down.

[Ken H.]

Hayward knows he is going down.

I certainly hope so. That he is. That he knows it.

[Selden]

Cut the guy some slack. He's only been in the job for 3 years, and much of his effort has been to undo the cost mess left by his predecessor. Hayward came up through the ranks, and knows a lot about oil production, soup to nuts. Yes, he's said some dumb things in the past month, but he's probably getting by on 4 hours of sleep a night, and has people above him pushing to put out a positive message.

 

Hayward, 53, a ruddy-faced geologist who worked on rigs around the world before rising through BP's exploration department to become CEO of Europe's largest oil company in 2007, is generally publicity-shy.

 

Born middle class in Slough, England, he joined BP after getting a Ph.D. in geology at the University of Edinburgh.

 

His reputation as an energetic, blunt, down-to-earth manager stood in contrast to his predecessor and mentor, Lord John Browne, a regal, cultured and closeted aristocrat who quit in a 2007 scandal over paying off a blackmailing boyfriend with company funds.

[John Ranalletta]

here