seabgb
Monday, October 11, 2010
Dead 80' Blue Whale Comes Ashore in California
A pregnant blue whale washed ashore on Bean Hollow Beach in California. The 80' carcass is being examined by biologists but it is suspected the animal was killed by a ship strike. Sad. Is it any wonder why so many species become extinct? The other day a friend sent me an email with pictures of a sea turtle egg harvest in Central America. People, if you insist on harvesting the spawn of animals, there won't be any animals left to spawn.
Friday, August 06, 2010
Gulf Spill - Static Kill Succeeds!
© BP p.l.c.BP successfully killed its errant well yesterday after pumping drilling mud and then cement into the well bore. If the bore and well head structure filled completely it's a good bit there will be no more oil seeping into the Gulf from the Macondo reservoir. But, as Admiral Thad Allen suggested in his press briefing yesterday, it's still too early to "celebrate." To ensure complete success, mud and cement have to be pumped into the reservoir from one or both of the relief wells.
I'll probably be one of the first and only ones to say it, but I think BP stood up to the plate and did what had to be done to control and correct this terrible accident. They could have done what Exxon did during (and following) the Valdez spill but instead took a higher road. I think they should be commended and not lambasted by the media or the public on this score. As far as the circumventing of safety rules and regulations, well, that's another story. Even there, though, they didn't do anything others weren't also doing.
I wonder how long it will be before BP or another company suggests a return run on the Macondo oil field. There's still a lot of oil down there.
Meanwhile, there's a debate going on as to the true environmental impact of the disaster. Is there or isn't there a continuing oil pollution and chemical dispersant problem in the Gulf?
-seabgb
Sunday, August 01, 2010
Monday, July 26, 2010
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
PoTUS Micro-Management of Oil Spill
PoTUS, a.k.a. President of the United States.
Here's a good article in the WSJ.
I had a feeling this was going on. Very early on in the crisis I suggested the president was treading a fine line with his intensive attempt to control BP's operations, a multi-national foreign company. At any moment they can tell him to f-off. What happens then?
Regardless, the politicized micromanagement of the response effort is done at the expense of the environment. The government is incapable of functioning in an efficient, economic or timely manner. This isn't a criticism of the Obama Administration. It's a criticism of government in general.
However, nobody in the Obama administration has ever run a business or handled a corporate emergency. They have no fiscal responsibility and no expertise in cost-crisis decision-making.
Part of me agrees with the government's thought process. "Keep recovering oil and flaring gas. Stick with the plan. Wait for the relief wells."
But BP engineers think they can static kill the well now, while the new cap is in place and holding. Maybe they're right. Maybe they know something about the relief wells they're not saying, e.g. that the relief wells are a long shot and that they always were.
At this point, you have no choice. You have to go with the experts. You have to look at the risks of not taking advantage of the lower pressure in the well bore; before it builds up again, maybe try a static kill with heavy mud.
Adapt and improvise.
PoTUS isn't sure. He wants more tests, more research, more time to weigh the risks.
Time is the killer, for sure.
~seabgb
Here's a good article in the WSJ.
I had a feeling this was going on. Very early on in the crisis I suggested the president was treading a fine line with his intensive attempt to control BP's operations, a multi-national foreign company. At any moment they can tell him to f-off. What happens then?
Regardless, the politicized micromanagement of the response effort is done at the expense of the environment. The government is incapable of functioning in an efficient, economic or timely manner. This isn't a criticism of the Obama Administration. It's a criticism of government in general.
However, nobody in the Obama administration has ever run a business or handled a corporate emergency. They have no fiscal responsibility and no expertise in cost-crisis decision-making.
Part of me agrees with the government's thought process. "Keep recovering oil and flaring gas. Stick with the plan. Wait for the relief wells."
But BP engineers think they can static kill the well now, while the new cap is in place and holding. Maybe they're right. Maybe they know something about the relief wells they're not saying, e.g. that the relief wells are a long shot and that they always were.
At this point, you have no choice. You have to go with the experts. You have to look at the risks of not taking advantage of the lower pressure in the well bore; before it builds up again, maybe try a static kill with heavy mud.
Adapt and improvise.
PoTUS isn't sure. He wants more tests, more research, more time to weigh the risks.
Time is the killer, for sure.
~seabgb
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Interesting Boats: Great Sailboats!
This is the Seaward 25. It's a shoal draft sailboat (25") that is both easy to trailer and comfortable to cruise. It has 5'9" of headroom below. Built by Hake yachts of Florida as a shallow water gunkholer, the boat has a very substantial following and a great fan base. Reportedly, at one time, Hake Yachts was putting out one a week. Although not billed as a bluewater pocket boat, you can still find testimonials from people on the net who say they have witnessed some nasty wind and weather.
The old classic bluewater pocket cruiser is the Flicka, designed by Bruce Bingham and based on a Rhode Island fishing boat. These were eventually semi-produiction built by Pacific Seacraft starting in 1977. The Flicka is unquestionably the smallest, most able sailing yacht out there. Many people put their Flicka's on trailers but with the full keel (3'3") and a total of 5' or more in trailer and boat depth to overcome, launching and recovering the boat from a ramp is a bit tricky. You need a heck of a good ramp with a decent drop off and a lot of winch cable, unless you drive an Army DUKW or LARC.
This is my favorite configuration of the Freedom 40. She's 46' OAL and has the low waist of Viking Knorr. Her stay-less rig is worry free and accommodations below make her an excellent long distance traveler. I love the sheer, the raised quarter deck and center cockpit. This is Black Magic II in Australia.~seabgb
Monday, July 19, 2010
China Becomes World's Largest Energy Consumer
* The Wall Street Journal
* BUSINESS
* JULY 19, 2010, 12:18 P.M. ET
China Passes U.S. as World's Biggest Energy Consumer
By SPENCER SWARTZ
China is now the world's biggest energy consumer, knocking the U.S. off a perch it held for more than a century, according to new data from the International Energy Agency.
The Paris-based agency, whose forecasts are generally regarded as bellwether indicators for the energy industry, said China devoured 2,252 million tons of oil equivalent last year, or about 4% more than the U.S., which burned through 2,170 million tons of oil equivalent. The oil-equivalent metric represents all forms of energy consumed, including crude oil, nuclear, coal, natural gas and renewable sources such as hydropower.
The figures reflect, in part, how the global recession hit the U.S. more severely than China and hurt American industrial activity and energy use. Still, China's total energy consumption has clocked annual double-digit growth rates for many years, driven by the country's big industrial base. Highlighting how quickly its energy demand has increased, China's total energy consumption was just half the size of the U.S. 10 years ago.
"The fact that China overtook the U.S. as the world's largest energy consumer symbolizes the start of a new age in the history of energy," IEA chief economist Fatih Birol said in an interview. The U.S. had been the biggest overall energy consumer since the early 1900s, he said. The IEA is an energy adviser to most of the world's biggest economies.
China's voracious energy demand helps explain why the country—which gets most of its electricity from coal, the dirtiest of fossil-fuel resources—passed the U.S. in 2007 as the world's largest emitter of carbon dioxide emissions and other greenhouse gases.
The U.S. is still by far the biggest energy consumer per capita, with the average American burning five times as much energy annually as the average Chinese citizen, said Mr. Birol, who has been in his current role for six years.
The U.S. also is the biggest oil consumer by a wide margin, going through on average roughly 19 million barrels a day—with China at a distant second at about 9.2 million barrels a day. But many oil analysts believe U.S. crude demand has peaked or is unlikely to grow very much in coming years because of improved energy efficiency and more-stringent vehicle fuel-efficiency regulations.
Journal Community
Prior to the recession, China had been expected to become the biggest energy consumer in about five years, but the economic malaise and energy-efficiency programs in the U.S. brought forward the date of that superlative, Mr. Birol said.
The decreased energy "intensity" of the U.S. economy is a key reason investors, such as General Electric Co., have increasingly looked to China as a driver of future growth. Mr. Birol said China requires total energy investments of some $4 trillion over the next 20 years to keep feeding its economy and to avoid power blackouts and fuel shortages.
Mr. Birol, previously an economist at the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, said China is expected to build over the next 15 years some 1,000 gigawatts of new power-generation capacity. That is about the total amount of electricity-generation capacity in the U.S. currently, and the construction of all those gigawatts occurred over several decades. "This demonstrates the major growth we are talking about" in energy demand and capacity growth in China, Mr. Birol said.
Full WSJ Article here.
* BUSINESS
* JULY 19, 2010, 12:18 P.M. ET
China Passes U.S. as World's Biggest Energy Consumer
By SPENCER SWARTZ
China is now the world's biggest energy consumer, knocking the U.S. off a perch it held for more than a century, according to new data from the International Energy Agency.
The Paris-based agency, whose forecasts are generally regarded as bellwether indicators for the energy industry, said China devoured 2,252 million tons of oil equivalent last year, or about 4% more than the U.S., which burned through 2,170 million tons of oil equivalent. The oil-equivalent metric represents all forms of energy consumed, including crude oil, nuclear, coal, natural gas and renewable sources such as hydropower.
The figures reflect, in part, how the global recession hit the U.S. more severely than China and hurt American industrial activity and energy use. Still, China's total energy consumption has clocked annual double-digit growth rates for many years, driven by the country's big industrial base. Highlighting how quickly its energy demand has increased, China's total energy consumption was just half the size of the U.S. 10 years ago.
"The fact that China overtook the U.S. as the world's largest energy consumer symbolizes the start of a new age in the history of energy," IEA chief economist Fatih Birol said in an interview. The U.S. had been the biggest overall energy consumer since the early 1900s, he said. The IEA is an energy adviser to most of the world's biggest economies.
China's voracious energy demand helps explain why the country—which gets most of its electricity from coal, the dirtiest of fossil-fuel resources—passed the U.S. in 2007 as the world's largest emitter of carbon dioxide emissions and other greenhouse gases.
The U.S. is still by far the biggest energy consumer per capita, with the average American burning five times as much energy annually as the average Chinese citizen, said Mr. Birol, who has been in his current role for six years.
The U.S. also is the biggest oil consumer by a wide margin, going through on average roughly 19 million barrels a day—with China at a distant second at about 9.2 million barrels a day. But many oil analysts believe U.S. crude demand has peaked or is unlikely to grow very much in coming years because of improved energy efficiency and more-stringent vehicle fuel-efficiency regulations.
Journal Community
Prior to the recession, China had been expected to become the biggest energy consumer in about five years, but the economic malaise and energy-efficiency programs in the U.S. brought forward the date of that superlative, Mr. Birol said.
The decreased energy "intensity" of the U.S. economy is a key reason investors, such as General Electric Co., have increasingly looked to China as a driver of future growth. Mr. Birol said China requires total energy investments of some $4 trillion over the next 20 years to keep feeding its economy and to avoid power blackouts and fuel shortages.
Mr. Birol, previously an economist at the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, said China is expected to build over the next 15 years some 1,000 gigawatts of new power-generation capacity. That is about the total amount of electricity-generation capacity in the U.S. currently, and the construction of all those gigawatts occurred over several decades. "This demonstrates the major growth we are talking about" in energy demand and capacity growth in China, Mr. Birol said.
Full WSJ Article here.
More on Climategate!
Without candour, we can't trust climate science - opinion - 14 July 2010 - New Scientist
Why are so many politicians and scientists eager to leave Climategate behind them?
~seabgb
Why are so many politicians and scientists eager to leave Climategate behind them?
~seabgb
Super Skimmer A Whale Report
From MarineLog:
July 18, 2010
A Whale won't be part of Gulf response
After an extended trial period, Federal On-Scene Coordinator Admiral Paul Zukunft announced that the giant converted ore/oil carrier A Whale will not be deployed as a part of the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill response.
The 1,115 foot long super skimmer went through an extensive operational review by a multiagency team under the supervision of the U.S. Coast Guard. The report concluded that after significant effort, the amount of oil recovered was negligible, and limited oil beyond a sheen was found in the cargo tanks."
"While its stature is impressive, 'A Whale' is not ideally suited to the needs of this response," said Admiral Zukunft. "We appreciate the ingenuity of the TMT team to try to make this innovative system work under these unique conditions. This is the largest oil spill response in our nation's history and we will continue to attack the oil as far offshore as possible with our fleet of hundreds of skimmers, controlled burns, and effective use of dispersant."
Bob Grantham, spokesman for TMT Offshore, said the A Whale concluded its final battery of tests Friday.
"The ship demonstrated that it can bring substantial volumes of capacity to bear in addressing oil spills, and can do so quickly and with great maneuverability," he noted. But "the particular conditions present in the Macondo spill did not afford the vessel the opportunity to recover a significant amount of oil. In large measure, this is due to the highly dispersed nature of the oil in the Gulf. When dispersants are used in high volume virtually from the point that oil leaves the well, it presents real challenges for high-volume skimming.
"We have learned much over the last several weeks about how to build a high-volume super-skimming task force capable of addressing oil spills wherever they may occur in the future. What our experience now tells us is that future oil spill response protocol should deploy super-skimmer capacity as soon as possible and as close as possible to the source of the spill. In this fashion, effective organic containment of oil can be undertaken without substantial use of chemical dispersants. Thereafter, and in more judicious application, dispersants can be used as needed.
"We intend to continue to work with our colleagues at the Coast Guard, the Navy, and elsewhere in the U.S. government, along with experts and authorities around the globe, to modify and perfect super-skimmers.
"As Mr. Nobu Su, the CEO of TMT Offshore has remarked, 'We came to the Gulf with a sophisticated piece of equipment at no cost to taxpayers or BP to see if we could assist the communities and environment of the area. While conditions we found in the Gulf limited the A Whale's effectiveness, we intend to put what we have learned to good use as part of a global solution to oil spill response wherever future incidents may occur.'"
Oil Spill Response Decision Making
What is going on down there in the Gulf? BP says the new cap is holding. Admiral Allen says there's not enough pressure registered at the well head and that the lower than expected pressure readings could mean a breach in the well bore or a breach in the well head structure. He wants more tests. This is insane. Somewhere along the line BP and/or Admiral Allen and/or the government have lost their bearings. Three weeks ago they told us we would be collecting 80,000 barrels a day, supposedly more than enough capacity to cover the total amount gushing into the Gulf. Now they're acting as if they plan to let the new cap do all the work, walk away from the well head completely and move assets elsewhere.
Know-it-all Congressman Edward Markey of Massachusetts had this to say in a letter to Admiral Allen:
"If the well remains fully shut in until the relief well is completed, we may never have a fully accurate determination of the flow rate from this well. If so, BP -- which has consistently underestimated the flow rate -- might evade billions of dollars of fines."
When it comes to spending money Markey seem to have no concept of the dollar; when it comes to collecting it, he doesn't want to miss a dime.
Hey, Markey! It's not just about the money!
Where is this sudden change in spill containment coming from? Is it BP or the government? We should stick to the original plan. The new cap is in place. It's holding back the pressure better than expected. We should use this opportunity between now and the end of July or beginning of August - when the relief wells are expected to hit their marks - to collect as much oil and flare as much gas as possible.
The problem, I suspect, is that the government, in its infinite wisdom, established operational conditions that make shutting the well and leaving it a higher priority than siphoning the oil. They told BP that BP would have to pay for everything. They would be fined on the total spill amount AND have to pay all clean-up and economic hardship costs. BP also announced they were donating revenues from spilled oil to Gulf Coast charities. This latter decision was prompted by President Obama when he promised the American people that BP would not profit one cent from the oil coming out of the well.
Add to this the U.S.C.G. and E.P.A. general rule of thumb with respect to spilled or leaking pollutants. Rule number one: Stop The Leak!
But as Admiral Thad Allen, BP and President Obama has said on numerous occasions: This is an unprecedented situation that requires an unprecedented response.
Why should BP spend billions keeping the Q4000 and the Helix Producer and all the other oil industry assets on scene if it can prove to the government's satisfaction that no more oil is leaking from the well? There is no incentive for BP to do anything more than what is required of it by the U.S. Government and BP's Board of Directors. Stop the leak. Clean up the spill. Pay the fines.
Herein lies the insanity. So what if the pressure and seismic tests with the new cap in place conclude the well is secure? That's now. What happens tomorrow, or a week from tomorrow? What happens if the well burps a huge, catastrophic bubble of methane gas? Isn't it better to have a relief valve of some sort, like the flaring and collection capability that's currently available with the Q4000 and Helix Producer?
I realize there's a huge air pollution nightmare associated with the burning and flaring of gas and oil, and I realize that the collection of oil on the surface and subsequent transfer of oil to cargo ships adds another pollution risk to the equation. But neutralizing the pressure in the well seems to me to be more important than the quick fix of this containment cap, and to that end, the Q4000 and Helix Producer have an important job to do.
According to BP's latest update:
I think Admiral Allen and the other government authorities (It's a mouthful, isn't it?) should step back and keep the recovery and flaring assets on scene and working. Stick to the plan. Don't put all your faith in this cap. Take the slow, deliberate approach to neutralizing the well.
~seabgb
Know-it-all Congressman Edward Markey of Massachusetts had this to say in a letter to Admiral Allen:
"If the well remains fully shut in until the relief well is completed, we may never have a fully accurate determination of the flow rate from this well. If so, BP -- which has consistently underestimated the flow rate -- might evade billions of dollars of fines."
When it comes to spending money Markey seem to have no concept of the dollar; when it comes to collecting it, he doesn't want to miss a dime.
Hey, Markey! It's not just about the money!
Where is this sudden change in spill containment coming from? Is it BP or the government? We should stick to the original plan. The new cap is in place. It's holding back the pressure better than expected. We should use this opportunity between now and the end of July or beginning of August - when the relief wells are expected to hit their marks - to collect as much oil and flare as much gas as possible.
The problem, I suspect, is that the government, in its infinite wisdom, established operational conditions that make shutting the well and leaving it a higher priority than siphoning the oil. They told BP that BP would have to pay for everything. They would be fined on the total spill amount AND have to pay all clean-up and economic hardship costs. BP also announced they were donating revenues from spilled oil to Gulf Coast charities. This latter decision was prompted by President Obama when he promised the American people that BP would not profit one cent from the oil coming out of the well.
Add to this the U.S.C.G. and E.P.A. general rule of thumb with respect to spilled or leaking pollutants. Rule number one: Stop The Leak!
But as Admiral Thad Allen, BP and President Obama has said on numerous occasions: This is an unprecedented situation that requires an unprecedented response.
Why should BP spend billions keeping the Q4000 and the Helix Producer and all the other oil industry assets on scene if it can prove to the government's satisfaction that no more oil is leaking from the well? There is no incentive for BP to do anything more than what is required of it by the U.S. Government and BP's Board of Directors. Stop the leak. Clean up the spill. Pay the fines.
Herein lies the insanity. So what if the pressure and seismic tests with the new cap in place conclude the well is secure? That's now. What happens tomorrow, or a week from tomorrow? What happens if the well burps a huge, catastrophic bubble of methane gas? Isn't it better to have a relief valve of some sort, like the flaring and collection capability that's currently available with the Q4000 and Helix Producer?
I realize there's a huge air pollution nightmare associated with the burning and flaring of gas and oil, and I realize that the collection of oil on the surface and subsequent transfer of oil to cargo ships adds another pollution risk to the equation. But neutralizing the pressure in the well seems to me to be more important than the quick fix of this containment cap, and to that end, the Q4000 and Helix Producer have an important job to do.
According to BP's latest update:
BP continues to work cooperatively with the guidance and approval of the National Incident Commander and the leadership and direction of federal government including the Department of Energy, Department of the Interior, Federal Science Team, Bureau of Ocean Energy, Management, Regulation and Enforcement, U.S. Coast Guard and secretaries Ken Salazar and Steven Chu. At this time, the well integrity test on the MC252 exploratory well continues.
During the test, the three ram capping stack has been closed, shutting in the well. All sub-sea containment systems (namely, the Q4000 and Helix Producer systems) have been temporarily suspended.
I think Admiral Allen and the other government authorities (It's a mouthful, isn't it?) should step back and keep the recovery and flaring assets on scene and working. Stick to the plan. Don't put all your faith in this cap. Take the slow, deliberate approach to neutralizing the well.
~seabgb
Sunday, July 18, 2010
Well Pressure and New Cap
I guess I really don't understand what's going on. Government scientists wanted pressure tests conducted to make sure the well wasn't leaking. The tests were suppose to last 24 to 48 hours. After 48 hours, they were extended another 24 hours, then extended again, and all the while the Helix Producer and the Q4000 are on hold, waiting for government approval to be allowed to continue siphoning off oil from the well. They're waiting for pressure to build to 8,000 or 9,000 psi, which will prove, somehow, that there's well integrity and no leak.
Meanwhile, the Helix Producer and the q4000 are on standby.
But why are we waiting for the well to build more and more pressure. Isn't pressure containment's evil twin? Won't the buildup of pressure increase risk of another leak in the well? What are we waiting to prove, that the well will build up enough pressure to eventually destroy integrity of the well bore?
The cap is holding. There are no apparent leaks. Why don't we start siphoning oil off to the tune of 80,000 barrels per day (as we were promised weeks ago) and let the cap do it's job? If we have to bug out of there for a hurricane, we can shut the well down completely or maybe even partially and come back. Wasn't that the point of this whole exercise?
There is no viable alternative to this plan other than the relief wells. And every barrel of oil collected is a barrel of oil not in the reservoir helping to contribute to a buildup of pressure. Why not take the oil out now and stop worrying about whether or not the containment cap will hold? All this wasted time in testing is wasting time that could be used collecting oil and reducing, however minimally, the chance for another blowout. Four days at 80,000 barrels per day is 320,000 barrels of oil, not to mention all the volatile gas that's flared out of the well.
Even if the well builds up to 10,000 psi of pressure, what's to stop it from burping up to 20,000 psi or even 50,000 psi two or three weeks from now? I'm not saying it can. I have no expertise in these matters. But I would like to hear from Admiral Allen and/or the government science board why it's so important to prove the cap can provide 100% containment.
I imagine the Q&A going something like this:
Q. Why is it so important to check the pressure?
A. We want t to make sure that if we have to leave the well in the event of a serious weather event, a hurricane for example, that the cap will hold.
Q. But even if the tests prove conclusive that the cap will hold is that a guarantee it will continue to hold for all time.
A. No. We can't be absolutely certain of that. There are always destructive forces at work in the well bore.
Q. And if the tests prove the opposite, what's the alternative?
A. We have other contingency plans.
Q. Like what?
A. Other plans, And we're ahead of schedule with the relief wells.
Q. But the cap seems to be holding. Isn't that more than we had hoped for from the start? If it holds at 6,700 psi, why not start recovering oil and flaring gas? Won't the oil and gas taken out of the well help reduce pressure?
A. We feel we need to be sure the cap will hold.
Q. But at no time when this cap plan was talked about did anyone think it would completely hold back the well. From the start we were told this cap would allow us to recover up to 80,000 barrels of oil per day? It can do that now. Why aren't we doing it? Seems to me the 100% containment criteria is something the government only came up with after the fact. Isn't 100% containment via the well head structure really just a bonus?
A. Next question.
I know some of you reporters and broadcasters down there are thinking the same things, so how about getting some answers on this.
TIA,
~seabgb
Meanwhile, the Helix Producer and the q4000 are on standby.
But why are we waiting for the well to build more and more pressure. Isn't pressure containment's evil twin? Won't the buildup of pressure increase risk of another leak in the well? What are we waiting to prove, that the well will build up enough pressure to eventually destroy integrity of the well bore?
The cap is holding. There are no apparent leaks. Why don't we start siphoning oil off to the tune of 80,000 barrels per day (as we were promised weeks ago) and let the cap do it's job? If we have to bug out of there for a hurricane, we can shut the well down completely or maybe even partially and come back. Wasn't that the point of this whole exercise?
There is no viable alternative to this plan other than the relief wells. And every barrel of oil collected is a barrel of oil not in the reservoir helping to contribute to a buildup of pressure. Why not take the oil out now and stop worrying about whether or not the containment cap will hold? All this wasted time in testing is wasting time that could be used collecting oil and reducing, however minimally, the chance for another blowout. Four days at 80,000 barrels per day is 320,000 barrels of oil, not to mention all the volatile gas that's flared out of the well.
Even if the well builds up to 10,000 psi of pressure, what's to stop it from burping up to 20,000 psi or even 50,000 psi two or three weeks from now? I'm not saying it can. I have no expertise in these matters. But I would like to hear from Admiral Allen and/or the government science board why it's so important to prove the cap can provide 100% containment.
I imagine the Q&A going something like this:
Q. Why is it so important to check the pressure?
A. We want t to make sure that if we have to leave the well in the event of a serious weather event, a hurricane for example, that the cap will hold.
Q. But even if the tests prove conclusive that the cap will hold is that a guarantee it will continue to hold for all time.
A. No. We can't be absolutely certain of that. There are always destructive forces at work in the well bore.
Q. And if the tests prove the opposite, what's the alternative?
A. We have other contingency plans.
Q. Like what?
A. Other plans, And we're ahead of schedule with the relief wells.
Q. But the cap seems to be holding. Isn't that more than we had hoped for from the start? If it holds at 6,700 psi, why not start recovering oil and flaring gas? Won't the oil and gas taken out of the well help reduce pressure?
A. We feel we need to be sure the cap will hold.
Q. But at no time when this cap plan was talked about did anyone think it would completely hold back the well. From the start we were told this cap would allow us to recover up to 80,000 barrels of oil per day? It can do that now. Why aren't we doing it? Seems to me the 100% containment criteria is something the government only came up with after the fact. Isn't 100% containment via the well head structure really just a bonus?
A. Next question.
I know some of you reporters and broadcasters down there are thinking the same things, so how about getting some answers on this.
TIA,
~seabgb
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)