Guest Blog

BP Installs Spill Containment Scheme Number 4

A riser cap is capturing a fraction of the leak as BP seeks to optimize an imperfect seal.

Peter Fairley 06/04/2010

  • 7 Comments
An image from BP's spillcam. Credit: BP

BP is capturing oil at a rate of 1,000 barrels-per-day via its latest containment scheme--a cap and new riser installed on its gushing Gulf spill last night, according to federal response coordinator and Coast Guard Admiral Thad Allen. But video feeds confirm that far more crude is still spilling into the sea from under the cap--at least 11,000 barrels per day if one subtracts 1,000 bpd from the minimum flow estimate of the Deepwater Horizon spill released by a federal task force last week.

BP Americas chief operating officer Doug Suttles said in a media briefing this morning that the cap (BP containment scheme #4 by Carbon-Nation's count) could ultimately capture over 90% of the leak. But Suttles and his company have proved unreasonably optimistic before, and could be once again.

That's because effective capture requires a solid seal between the cap and the leaking riser from the Deepwater Horizon rig, whose destruction in April set off the spill. Unfortunately, a preparatory operation yesterday to cut away most of the leaking riser just above the Deepwater Horizon's blowout preventer (BOP) left a jagged edge that could be tough to seal on. Allen told reporters that it may take 48 hours to optimize the system, and downgraded Suttles' hopeful projection to a "goal."

In a separate media briefing this morning BP senior vp for exploration Kent Wells said BP will ramp up suction slowly to avoid pulling in water that could combine with natural gas to form frozen hydrates and clog the pipe. To ward off hydrates they are also pumping hot water down around the new riser pipe, and methanol into the pipe.

BP's official update this morning on its Lower Marine Riser Package repeated its now mantra-like disclaimer about the challenge of engineering on the fly in mile-deep waters:

Systems such as the LMRP containment cap never before have been deployed at these depths and conditions. The containment system's efficiency, continued operation, and ability to contain the oil and gas cannot be assured.

Those caveats ring true given BP's string of tech failures as Deepwater Horizon's botched well has pumped over 20 million gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico:

  • BP's new riser cap must seal on a jagged edge because a cleaner-cutting diamond-tipped saw blade jammed in the leaking riser. BP used a massive pair of shears instead.
  • Gushing oil and gas blew back mud and junk that BP pumped into the Deepwater Horizon's BOP, defeating last week's much-vaunted Top Kill operation.
  • BP's pre-Top Kill riser insertion tube (BP containment scheme #3) never caught more than one fifth of the total flow.
  • Frozen hydrates of water and natural gas instantly clogged the coffer dam (BP containment scheme #2) that BP lowered over the BOP early last month.
  • The BOP's rams ignored instructions to close off the leak in the first two weeks after the accident (BP containment scheme #1), not to mention during the accident itself.

As always, BP has a menu of new tech options in the wings. Six other riser cap fittings can be tried for size in case the one now in place can't seal. BP will also try to suck oil and gas out of the BOP via its choke and kill lines (through which it pumped drilling mud and junk during the Top Kill). And the troubled oil and gas giant says drilling of two relief wells to intersect and cement the leaking well at its deepest point--the only proven means of definitive offshore blowout control--remains on course for August.

However, based on the drubbing BP's tech team has taken so far and the firm's repeated caveats about operating at a mile under, it is increasingly tough for any oil and gas driller to deny the following conclusion: technology is not equal to the challenge of blowout control in deepwater conditions--at least not yet.

Peter Fairley, an independent journalist and editor of the Web journal Carbon-Nation, tracks energy innovation around the globe, from the solar-powered villages of Bolivia's Cordillera to China's mechanizing coalfields.

Print

Close Comments

To comment, please sign in or register

Forgot my password

Gaetano Marano

246 Comments

  • 619 Days Ago
  • 06/04/2010

>>> despite the optimistic claims BP has clearly FAILED again >>>

.
.
despite the optimistic claims BP has clearly FAILED again to stop the oil spill, since, 45 days after and four different methods adopted, also the "cap" used this night hasn't solved the problem, because, only 1000 barrels (or less than 5% of the 20,000 barrels spewed every day from the BP well) is now collected by the cap's top pipe, while, now, BP aims (read: "hopes") to contain "90%" of the oil leak (that STILL gushes copiously from the cap bottom and will increase very much when the four vents atop the "containment" cap will be closed) but, also assuming the leak will fall to 10-30%, it, anyway, means, that several millions more gallons will be spilled in the Gulf of Mexico and in the Atlantic ocean, until the new well will finished in mid-August (as "promised" by BP...) to divert the oil flux from the damaged well
.
well, despite I'm SURE that BP still won't listen any suggestion from me or other, I've developed a further, cheap and simple idea to quickly CLOSE the wellhead and to STOP NOW up to 100% of the oil leak, and NOT only the expected/hoped "90%" using the (current) BP's "cap" system
.
my new idea uses a TRUE cap (without any kind of pipe to gather the oil) to be inserted in the cutted riser on the top of the wellhead to (finally and completely) CLOSE it
.
http://bit.ly/c8y9GX
.
.

Reply

Woops

1 Comment

  • 618 Days Ago
  • 06/05/2010

Re: >>> despite the optimistic claims BP has clearly FAILED again >>>

Has anyone responded to u?  why are'nt they using the flange?

Reply

Gaetano Marano

246 Comments

  • 616 Days Ago
  • 06/07/2010

Re: >>> despite the optimistic claims BP has clearly FAILED again >>>

.
.
.
BP Plans to Replace Containment Cap Next Month
.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/06/07/national/main6557952.shtml
.
"Company [BP] Believes a Bigger Cap Will "Provide a Better, Tighter Fit" over Oil Well Blowout at the Bottom of the Gulf of Mexico"
.
it's (exactly) MY IDEA published June 6 on my blog and posted hundreds times (or sent via email with the text below) on several blogs everywhere on the Web... CBS, CNN, DHR Facebook Page, BBC, Huffington Post, WSJ, Blooomberg, NYT, BusinessWeek, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, etc. etc. etc.
.
thanks BP to adopt MY IDEA but NO THANKS for have NOT acknowledged me as its inventor... :[
.
the BP's "cap" CLEARLY is a DRAMATICALLY WRONG idea!!!
.
don't wait more DAYS or WEEKS to do something better!!!
.
take a look and adopt NOW my NEW idea just published!!!
.
it can STOP up to 100% of the leak in a matter of days!!!
.
http://bit.ly/c8y9GX
.
.
.

Reply

Gaetano Marano

246 Comments

  • 618 Days Ago
  • 06/05/2010

>>> live video >>>

.
.
.
live video of the """fixed""" oil spill issue here:
.
http://www.deepwaterbp.com/
.
.
.

Reply

tmcmurph

36 Comments

  • 616 Days Ago
  • 06/07/2010

Why take the risk?

We have enough natural gas in the shale deposits to power our society for centuries. Why are we drilling off shore at these depths and deeper? We don't need the energy. To give you an idea of how much natural gas is now available ON LAND you could convert all the coal and nuke plants to NG and still have 5 to 6 decades of fuel.

We don't have an energy policy. We have an oil policy and it is the large oil companies calling the shots.

The energy crisis was canceled 5 years ago when the scientists and engineers figured out how to get the natural gas out of shale deposits. It is time to stop and think about energy not oil.

Reply

garylynn

44 Comments

  • 616 Days Ago
  • 06/07/2010

Has anyone considered sucking it up at the source?

Is it possible to put a big cone over the top of the whole thing and suck up the oil and some water faster than it gushes out of the well? It would require some high capacity pumps and mile long hoses, but I figure they should have that kind of stuff laying around already. 

Reply

Bio

Analysis and insight from occasional correspondents and decision makers.

Subscribe to the Guest Blog RSS Feed

Advertisement
Advertisement

Facebook

Advertisement