Mother of all gushers - BP Oil Disaster in Gulf of Mexico
- Thread starter jelyfish
- Start date
Edit added: Here's the original from The Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/aug/19/bp-oil-spill-scientist-retracts-assurances
http://wireupdate.com/wires/8833/senior-u-s-scientist-rescinds-previous-claim-that-34-of-oil-from-spill-is-gone-says-most-is-still-there/
http://wireupdate.com/wires/8833/senior-u-s-scientist-rescinds-previous-claim-that-34-of-oil-from-spill-is-gone-says-most-is-still-there/
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=20744
"Quote
Portions of the Gulf are So Toxic that Dolphins, Fish, Crabs, Stingrays and Other Animals are "Trying to Crawl Out of the Water"
On Friday, Inter Press Service reported:
Danny Ross, a commercial fisherman from Biloxi… said he has watched horseshoe crabs trying to crawl out of the water, and other marine life like stingrays and flounder trying to escape the water as well. He believes this is because the water is hypoxic. …
David Wallis, another fisherman from Biloxi… [said] “I’ve seen crabs crawling out of the water in the middle of the day. This is going to be affecting us far into the future.”
This has been a common occurrence since BP started spilling oil into the Gulf.
The Post Chronicle noted on August 12th:
Some local fishermen say they are seeing strange behavior by marine life -- mullets, crabs and other creatures which normally stay well under water have been sighted congregating on the surface -- and they relate this to the spill.
***
"It looks like all of the sea life is trying to get out of the water," said Alabama fisherman Stan Fournier. "In the 40 years I have been on these waters I've never seen anything like this before."
The Advocate-Messenger pointed out on July 31st:
Besides potentially maintaining higher levels of toxicity, the oil trapped in the water column is also suffocating the ocean, causing radical drops in oxygen levels never before seen, [Monty Graham, a biological oceanographer specializing in plankton at the Dauphin Island Sea Lab on the coast of Alabama] said.
Following the oil and methane spill, Graham’s measurements of oxygen levels in the waters where he studies plankton dropped to two to three times lower than normal, to a level so low most animals cannot tolerate it.
That suffocating effect is why all kinds of sea animals have been showing up in greater and greater numbers, closer and closer to shore — they can’t breathe in their normal habitats anymore.
And AP wrote in June:
Dolphins and sharks are showing up in surprisingly shallow water just off the Florida coast. Mullets, crabs, rays and small fish congregate by the thousands off an Alabama pier. Birds covered in oil are crawling deep into marshes, never to be seen again.
Marine scientists studying the effects of the BP disaster are seeing some strange — and troubling — phenomena.
Fish and other wildlife are fleeing the oil out in the Gulf and clustering in cleaner waters along the coast. But that is not the hopeful sign it might appear to be, researchers say.
The animals' presence close to shore means their usual habitat is badly polluted, and the crowding could result in mass die-offs as fish run out of oxygen. Also, the animals could easily get devoured by predators.
"A parallel would be: Why are the wildlife running to the edge of a forest on fire? There will be a lot of fish, sharks, turtles trying to get out of this water they detect is not suitable," said Larry Crowder, a Duke University marine biologist.
Tragically, when sea animals crowd into shallow water in an attempt to escape pollution, they can quickly use up all available oxygen.
As the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection writes:
The warmer water is the less dissolved oxygen it is able to hold. If the fish schooled very tightly in shallows very close to shore for any reason, they may have simply used up all the oxygen that was available to them and died.”
Global Research Articles by Washington's Blog
"Quote
Portions of the Gulf are So Toxic that Dolphins, Fish, Crabs, Stingrays and Other Animals are "Trying to Crawl Out of the Water"
On Friday, Inter Press Service reported:
Danny Ross, a commercial fisherman from Biloxi… said he has watched horseshoe crabs trying to crawl out of the water, and other marine life like stingrays and flounder trying to escape the water as well. He believes this is because the water is hypoxic. …
David Wallis, another fisherman from Biloxi… [said] “I’ve seen crabs crawling out of the water in the middle of the day. This is going to be affecting us far into the future.”
This has been a common occurrence since BP started spilling oil into the Gulf.
The Post Chronicle noted on August 12th:
Some local fishermen say they are seeing strange behavior by marine life -- mullets, crabs and other creatures which normally stay well under water have been sighted congregating on the surface -- and they relate this to the spill.
***
"It looks like all of the sea life is trying to get out of the water," said Alabama fisherman Stan Fournier. "In the 40 years I have been on these waters I've never seen anything like this before."
The Advocate-Messenger pointed out on July 31st:
Besides potentially maintaining higher levels of toxicity, the oil trapped in the water column is also suffocating the ocean, causing radical drops in oxygen levels never before seen, [Monty Graham, a biological oceanographer specializing in plankton at the Dauphin Island Sea Lab on the coast of Alabama] said.
Following the oil and methane spill, Graham’s measurements of oxygen levels in the waters where he studies plankton dropped to two to three times lower than normal, to a level so low most animals cannot tolerate it.
That suffocating effect is why all kinds of sea animals have been showing up in greater and greater numbers, closer and closer to shore — they can’t breathe in their normal habitats anymore.
And AP wrote in June:
Dolphins and sharks are showing up in surprisingly shallow water just off the Florida coast. Mullets, crabs, rays and small fish congregate by the thousands off an Alabama pier. Birds covered in oil are crawling deep into marshes, never to be seen again.
Marine scientists studying the effects of the BP disaster are seeing some strange — and troubling — phenomena.
Fish and other wildlife are fleeing the oil out in the Gulf and clustering in cleaner waters along the coast. But that is not the hopeful sign it might appear to be, researchers say.
The animals' presence close to shore means their usual habitat is badly polluted, and the crowding could result in mass die-offs as fish run out of oxygen. Also, the animals could easily get devoured by predators.
"A parallel would be: Why are the wildlife running to the edge of a forest on fire? There will be a lot of fish, sharks, turtles trying to get out of this water they detect is not suitable," said Larry Crowder, a Duke University marine biologist.
Tragically, when sea animals crowd into shallow water in an attempt to escape pollution, they can quickly use up all available oxygen.
As the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection writes:
The warmer water is the less dissolved oxygen it is able to hold. If the fish schooled very tightly in shallows very close to shore for any reason, they may have simply used up all the oxygen that was available to them and died.”
Global Research Articles by Washington's Blog
Gonzo
The Living Force
That is just so horrible I can hardly bear to hear it.
No matter how aware I am of the great possibility things like this will happen, I could never brace myself enough for the horrible images I conjured in my mind as I read this and imagine the suffering of all the aquatic life forms.
It's a real test to not think emotionally and not those responsible to experience what they caused.
In my attempt to cheer myself up...I am hopeful something is happening to act as a creative balance for all this entropy.
Gonzo
No matter how aware I am of the great possibility things like this will happen, I could never brace myself enough for the horrible images I conjured in my mind as I read this and imagine the suffering of all the aquatic life forms.
It's a real test to not think emotionally and not those responsible to experience what they caused.
In my attempt to cheer myself up...I am hopeful something is happening to act as a creative balance for all this entropy.
Gonzo
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100823/ts_alt_afp/usenvironmentfish
Thousands of dead fish reported at mouth of Mississippi
Mon Aug 23, 7:33 pm ET
NEW ORLEANS, Louisiana (AFP) – Thousands of fish have turned up dead at the mouth of Mississippi River, prompting authorities to check whether oil was the cause of mass death, local media reports said Monday.
The fish were found Sunday floating on the surface of the water and collected in booms that had been deployed to contain oil that leaked from the BP spill in the Gulf of Mexico, the Times-Picayune reported.
"By our estimates there were thousands, and I'm talking about 5,000 to 15,000 dead fish," St Bernard Parish President Craig Taffaro was quoted as saying in a statement.
He said crabs, sting rays, eel, drum, speckled trout and red fish were among the species that turned up dead.
Taffaro said there was some recoverable oil in the area, and officials from the state's wildlife and fisheries division were sampling the water.
But he added, "We don't want to jump to any conclusions because we've had some oxygen issues by the Bayou La Loutre Dam from time to time."
Thousands of dead fish reported at mouth of Mississippi
Mon Aug 23, 7:33 pm ET
NEW ORLEANS, Louisiana (AFP) – Thousands of fish have turned up dead at the mouth of Mississippi River, prompting authorities to check whether oil was the cause of mass death, local media reports said Monday.
The fish were found Sunday floating on the surface of the water and collected in booms that had been deployed to contain oil that leaked from the BP spill in the Gulf of Mexico, the Times-Picayune reported.
"By our estimates there were thousands, and I'm talking about 5,000 to 15,000 dead fish," St Bernard Parish President Craig Taffaro was quoted as saying in a statement.
He said crabs, sting rays, eel, drum, speckled trout and red fish were among the species that turned up dead.
Taffaro said there was some recoverable oil in the area, and officials from the state's wildlife and fisheries division were sampling the water.
But he added, "We don't want to jump to any conclusions because we've had some oxygen issues by the Bayou La Loutre Dam from time to time."
Seraphina
Jedi Master
NOAA is blaming the sharp increase in sea turtle deaths on shrimp trawlers...that somehow the oil had nothing to do with it, so it must be the nets.
http://www.houmatoday.com/article/20100824/articles/100829741
really?...no signs of oil contamination? Are they relying on the sniff test again? Well, I smell something....BS
http://www.houmatoday.com/article/20100824/articles/100829741
more at link
really?...no signs of oil contamination? Are they relying on the sniff test again? Well, I smell something....BS
durabone
Jedi Council Member
Thanks. I also find it interesting that one of the acknowledged side effects of corexit is oxygen depletion, in part due to Propylene Glycol. Yet this connection is totally skipped (missed?) in these recent stories. I posted a pre-spill site earlier in this thread that shows the oxygen depleted region as it existed before the catastrophe.
durabone
Jedi Council Member
Newly Discovered Oil-Eating Microbe Flourishing in Gulf
_http://www.aolnews.com/gulf-oil-spill/article/newly-discovered-oil-eating-microbe-flourishing-in-gulf/19606738?icid=main|main|dl1|sec3_lnk1|165999
Hunh? Newly discovered? Didn't I hear rumors of this technology for years? Anyone remember specifics?
_http://www.aolnews.com/gulf-oil-spill/article/newly-discovered-oil-eating-microbe-flourishing-in-gulf/19606738?icid=main|main|dl1|sec3_lnk1|165999
Hunh? Newly discovered? Didn't I hear rumors of this technology for years? Anyone remember specifics?
Gonzo
The Living Force
Ah yes, GM bacteria. Isn't that what the Israelis were alluding to recently, as if they "discovered" this bacteria? It was mentioned a few weeks ago in this thread (perhaps around Aug 7th).
I assume oil eating bacteria which has most likely been around for billions of years, is already very effective in what it does, including using up all the oxygen around it while it feeds.
Maybe they found a way to have it create oxygen instead of use it up. ;)
More likely, they created something minor yet novel, sufficient to patent so it can be marketed as an oil spill panacea. I can only guess what the novel traits might be, but in GM crops, they generally are designed to combat obstacles (fungal resistance, for example), to enhance a current expression of the organism (ex. higher yield, higher nutrition), or to introduce new features (ex. Colour, different shape, etc.).
So, we can expect a modification of current bacteria that will be toxic to predators, more hungry than ever, and glows in the dark so they can show it on a big screen tv and say, "please direct your attention to the tiny purple dots on the screen. These are our super-duper, invincible oil eradicating partners in saving the world. Now go back to sleep as all is well. Oh, by the way, these little buggers are breeding like mad, so you're going to have to fork over millions of dollars in licensing fees."
Gonzo
I assume oil eating bacteria which has most likely been around for billions of years, is already very effective in what it does, including using up all the oxygen around it while it feeds.
Maybe they found a way to have it create oxygen instead of use it up. ;)
More likely, they created something minor yet novel, sufficient to patent so it can be marketed as an oil spill panacea. I can only guess what the novel traits might be, but in GM crops, they generally are designed to combat obstacles (fungal resistance, for example), to enhance a current expression of the organism (ex. higher yield, higher nutrition), or to introduce new features (ex. Colour, different shape, etc.).
So, we can expect a modification of current bacteria that will be toxic to predators, more hungry than ever, and glows in the dark so they can show it on a big screen tv and say, "please direct your attention to the tiny purple dots on the screen. These are our super-duper, invincible oil eradicating partners in saving the world. Now go back to sleep as all is well. Oh, by the way, these little buggers are breeding like mad, so you're going to have to fork over millions of dollars in licensing fees."
Gonzo
RyanX
The Living Force
LQB said:
Somebody sent me a couple of articles recently that are somewhat along these lines. I thought they might be worthy of discussion here. The blogger of these articles, BK Lim, claims to be a drilling expert from a third world country - obviously he's trying to remain anonymous for some reason.
Anyways, Lim's theory is that BP may have drilled not one, nor two, but possibly three wells, all in the general vicinity of this disaster, known as the Macondo site. He claims that the forensic evidence from the wreckage on the seafloor of the broken riser pipe and the rig platform itself points to the rig operating in a location other than the two sites mentioned in the video that LQB provided above. I'm not an expert in the physics here, so I will let others evaluate this blogger's claims.
From what he claims, he seems to have created somewhat of a stir at "The Oil Drum" (TOD) website forums. He seems to show a lot of contempt in his articles for the folks at TOD and his rants do get distracting at times. On the other hand, he may have a point that there are certain planted experts on these forums trying to smooth things over for BP. I'm really not sure.
Just as a warning, it took me a couple of readings to really absorb some of this since he throws around a lot of acronyms.
_http://bklim.newsvine.com/_news/2010/08/17/4913304-the-art-of-mass-deception-part-1-ballistic-analysis-of-dwh-riser-wreck
The Art of Mass Deception – Part 1 Ballistic Analysis of DWH & Riser wreck.
By BK Lim
14 August 2010
Coincidence is the word we often use when we want to hide the truth. The oil spill disaster has more than its fair share of coincidences. Matt Simmons’s death 4 days ago, is a great loss to all of us seeking the truth. In one of his final interviews, Matt Simmons said, “It was painful as can be… to be the only person in the industry that was willing to speak out.” This article is dedicated to him, all those (animals included) killed and those continuing to suffer from this mega disaster.
Despite BP’s numerous delay tactics, improprieties, inconsistencies and contradictions; the mainstream media, BP’s paid Bogus Press and “Oilmen Expert” bloggers never commented on the obvious flaws in BP’s rendition of the mega disaster. But the same Devil’s Advocates were so quick to bark and maul on articles or postings that disputed BP’s version of events. It was painful indeed to read these biased blogs hammering and mauling Matt Simmons’s character, professionalism and sanity, just because he had disputed BP’s claims and version of events. Many of Matt Simmons’s accounts have since been vindicated by recent whistleblowers’ accounts, evidence of previously undetected oil spill and gas seeps, and health hazards due to extensive usage of Corexit.
BP’s attempts to spin the disaster into an art form through the mass media and paid advertisement are all part of BP’s Charade. The failing Static Kill on the “wrongly” capped well (Macondo A) is just one of the “broken steps”. The return of BP Zombie Well by Fintan Dunne aptly described the multiple failures in trying to kill the wild well. Is there more to it? Did BP drill one or two wells? Apparently the wells were drilled outside their approved period of exploration. Despite what it seems Well B was not drilled at its proposed location. Instead after plugging well A, DWH drilled on an unreported location which blew on 20th April 2010. Were regulations contravened?
This article is the first of several series which will present evidence of mass deception for public discussion. Without doubt, underhand tactics and adulterated data would be used to discredit me and my articles as they had done to Matt Simmons. Bloggers would be employed to disseminate distorted facts and to confuse the general public, under the guise of technical discussions. Do not be intimidated by technical jargons meant to confuse, for the truth is always simple and logical. Judge what I have presented here for its true academic values and not from any political or vested perspective. There are no hidden motives in my series of articles other than to educate, disseminate the truth and point out the obvious flaws in the accounts of the disaster. My expertise in the field of geohazards geophysics is given here on a pro-bono basis as part of my contribution to speak up for Mother Earth so that we need not live in constant fear of another mega man-made disaster.
1 Was the wrong well capped?
As the list of things that do not add up, continues to grow longer and longer, it is becoming more obvious the cover-ups are as elaborate and extensive as the disaster itself. One has to wonder why would there be a need for such a colossal cover-up. The truth then must be more devastating than the disaster itself. It is always easier to tell the truth as the truth will not contradict any facts that are revealed over time. The bigger the lie the more elaborate is the effort needed to cover it. But all deception no matter how perfectly planned cannot cover all tracks. After all, Man proposes but God Disposes.
The starting point of contention has to be Well A (E 1,202,803.88, N 10,431,617.00) which was supposed to be the seabed location drilled when the disastrous blowout occurred on 20th April 2010. Is it a mere coincidence Well A is located outside the blowout circle drawn to connect the major debris from DWH? The source of any unconstrained explosion will always lie close to the “epicenter” of the blowout. While it is possible to have a skewed ellipsoid (as in explosions from directional charges), the debris field will be similarly skewed and not be a symmetrical circle. See figure 1 of DWH blowout CSI which was reproduced from the Macondo ROV Map Ver 1.0 compiled by Fintan Dunne on 9th Aug 2010. Tuttlet must be commended for compiling the original map showing the ROVs’ position in early August.
It is only logical that DWH would be drilling directly above the well’s seabed location within tolerance limits of a couple of percentage error. DWH being the “state of the art” drilling rig, was definitely capable of maintaining dynamic position accurate to 50ft or 1% of water depth. For all practical purposes, 3% or 150 ft would be the position tolerance limit at that depth. It is therefore intriguing that Well A should be more than 520ft SSE of DWH’s surface location. If this was true, then DWH was drilling with the riser string at an angle of almost 6º. Given the dynamic positioning capability of DWH, there should be no reason for DWH’s surface location to be so far away from well A; if indeed the seabed location was Well A when the blowout occurred on 20th April 2010.
2 Did Well A blow out on 20th April 2010?
BP in their press conferences gave the impression that the riser string was largely intact and still connected to the BOP on top of Well A’s well-head, albeit badly twisted and bent. The figures at 7a to 7e (DWH blowout CSI) by Al Jazeera illustrate the simplistic but illogical rendition of how DWH could have sunk to the present wreck position on the seabed with 3 leaks on the punctured riser.
Doubts that the capped well (Well A) may not be the actual well that blew on 20th April, is further fueled by the early video footage available to public in May. The videos showed oil gushing out of a partially buried, severed casing with several broken debris obviously associated with a catastrophic event. The oil gush seems to be flowing out of a sub-horizontal pipe (casing?) which apparently dips into the seabed within an “unnatural” seabed crater. This location referred to as S20BC, is approximately (estimated from the scatter plots of ROV coordinates) 720 ft NNW of Well A and just 120ft NW of DWH’s surface location. The water depth of 4960-4970 ft is consistent with the depth shown on the bathymetric chart. Figure 3 shows the charted location of these images presented in figures 3a -3d. Water depth at Well A is generally more than 4990 ft.
This is strange as in all past blowout investigations, the primary focus of attention should be the blown-out well (Well A?) and not any one of the three “secondary leaks” on the riser. Why the intense activities focusing on S20BC (supposedly the most serious of the 3 leaks on the riser) instead of Well A? Does action speak louder than words? Could S20BC be the real blowout well but misled as just a “secondary” leak on the riser? Another piece of Mass Deception?
Video footage of the faulty BOP on top of Well A was only widely available to the public from June onwards. In a video dated 4 June 2010, an apparent “Dispersant Ops” Rov showed the BOP at 61.8 ft above seabed level, at 221.5 ft WNW of Well A location. Figure 3d confirmed our suspicion that the BOP had been “busily travelling” around instead of being Static at Well A as we had been led to believe.
Stranger still, why does the partially buried, severed casing (at S20BC) with gushing oil and gas appear to resemble more of a broken well-head casing than a twisted or flattened riser? Why would the ROV video show the oil to be flowing from north to south? If the oil and gas were to flow from Well A to S20BC in the north through the “riser”, the flow direction should be south to north. This confirms that Well A could not be the source of the leaking oil and gas.
It was crucial to keep this key discrepancy secret initially to avoid adulteration of the ROV data. As expected, the recent video footage appears to have unreliable coordinates or had missing information; eg sudden jumps of several hundred feet in ROV position. While “jumps” in navigation or position can be due to a variety of instrumental errors or data lapses, it is more difficult to explain jumps that seem to converge to Well A location. Is this another evidence of “tampering with the data”?
3 The mystery of the Twisted Riser wreck standing 1500 ft above seabed
Figure 2 (DWH blowout CSI) illustrates that it would not be possible for the DWH wreck to have landed just 1,100 ft from Well A if the riser string was largely intact with the base attached to the BOP (BP’s official version).
Even if the riser string were to detach from DWH as it was sinking, the wrecks (both DWH and riser) would continue their motion northwards. By the time the riser string had tilted to 12.5º from the vertical, the burning DWH would be already 1082 ft from Well A and it would have sunk by 118 ft. It is also possible that DWH could have fallen apart much earlier at 6º tilt angle. In which case, the centre of the fallout circle would be very close to the observed surface location of DWH but the WDH wreck would have to sink by 27 ft. Thus while the WDH wreck could still land at the observed seabed location, the unbroken long riser string would not be so twisted and definitely not bent backwards at such an acute angle. It is only logical for a free-falling rigid string (anchored at the base to the BOP) to fall straight through the water column; thus ruling out such pronounced bending.
It is almost impossible to explain how the riser could have bent backwards at such an acute angle and landed at a standing position 1500 ft above the seabed, with the lower end of the riser still attached to the BOP. Either the mainstream media were totally misled or NOAA debris chart as shown in figure 2a is totally inaccurate. Surely the Press could not have been so meek, not to question the improbability of the twisted riser standing 1500 ft above the seafloor without breaking. Obviously BP was given a lot of leeway to cover its own charade with a “No Tough Questions” policy. This is BP’s Art of Mass Deception in action.
Even if the burning DWH had sunk with the riser string broken at the lower section, the swing momentum of any inclined rigid steel string would have propelled DWH towards its anchor point. NOAA debris chart is the documented evidence of physical laws governing the dynamics of DWH sinking. There is no way DWH’s wreck could have landed at its present seabed location 720ft away if DWH’s riser (steel) string was anchored to Well A.
The most likely anchor location of DWH’s riser string is S20BC. Figures 8a-8h show the likely sequence in the sinking of DWH following the blowout on 20th April 2010. The blowout was so powerful its upward thrust probably broke the lower 1/5 of the riser. The BOP with the broken riser tilted and fell to the seafloor bending the upper section of the well casing. Whether the BOP was later cut and removed from the well-head or whether it broke off from the well-head by the blowout, is open to question? This can be confirmed by unadulterated ROV operation reports.
BP probably removed the BOP with the bent riser and installed it on Well A several weeks after the 20th April blowout. It was only after the BOP installation on Well A, were video footage of the leaking BOP released for public consumption. Irrespective of the BOP’s “travel paths or transit points”, Well A could not have been the well location drilled by DWH when the 20th April blowout occurred. Period!
Figure 3a
Figure 3b
Figure 3c
Figure 3d
Figure 3
Figure 2a
Next part:
_http://bklim.newsvine.com/_news/2010/08/25/4966322-twisted-tale-of-the-missing-3rd-well-that-blew-art-of-mass-deceptionpart-2
Twisted tale of the missing 3rd well that blew -Art of Mass Deception–Part 2
By BK Lim
-23 August 2010
figure 112.1
1. Filling the critical truths in BP’s gapping official storyline and making sense of it all
On 10 March 2009 BP Exploration & Production Inc (BP) submitted an application to carry out exploration drilling on two wells (A and B) within the Macondo prospect; Lease OCS-G32306 Block - 252 Mississippi Canyon Area using a Semi-Submersible drilling rig (semi sub). The wells locations are:
Lat Long Easting (Lambert) Northing (Lambert)
Well A 28º 44’ 17.277” -88º 21’ 57.34” 1,202,803.88 10,431,617.00
Well B 28º 44’ 16.027” -88º 22’ 0.581” 1,202,514.00 10,431,494.00
TransOcean Marianas first drilled at Well A from 7 Oct till 9 Nov 2009. On 28th Oct 2009 Tony Hayward (CEO of BP) disposed 220,000 shares on the same day the Marianas reported some serious well problems which lasted till 31 Oct 2009. Ten (10) days later (on 9 Nov 2009) the well was officially abandoned due to damages sustained from Hurricane Ida. The total depth drilled was only 4,023ft (1,226m) below mud line (bml). On 17th Nov 2009, Byron E Grote another BP Director sold 150,000 of his BP share holding.
On 3rd Feb 2010 the Deepwater Horizon (owned and operated by TransOcean) was directed to drill Well A, by re-entering the previously abandoned well. BP has maintained that this was the only well drilled in February till the blowout on 20 April 2010. The well apparently took a total of 10.5 weeks to reach the targeted reservoir at 18,000 ft bml around 16 April; 6.5 weeks longer than expected. The Deepwater Horizon (DWH) caught fire in a blowout 4 days later (on 20 April 2010) which resulted in the worst ever mega-oil spill disaster experienced during peace time.
The mega disaster has not only killed millions of innocent wildlife and condemned thousands others to the ranks of the walking dead, it has also exposed the worst of human greed and reckless gambling of human lives and the environment by the irresponsible few who walked the corridors of power in the oil industry. This is the continuing untold story of the Art of Mass Deception (part 2) of the twisted tale of the missing third well that BP drilled and blew on 20 April 2010; killing 11 crews and injuring many of the 126 that were onboard DWH. It was a disaster that need not have happened, especially after numerous red flags and at least two near-misses.
The facts will show that the few who had been entrusted with the responsibility of managing BP’s exploration programmes, had been so reckless and had acted so selfishly for their own interests and ego, at the expense of the safety of the field personnel and the environment. It is no less than the crime of mass destruction. Since the accident till now, the efforts to stop the oil-gas gushes had been one lie after another; acts that were put up not to kill the wells but to deceive the world and to save their own skin.
On 17 Mar 2010, just a few days after the out of control well situation that nearly blew DWH, Tony Hayward led the pack by disposing off 223,228 shares (1/3 of his total holdings) just a month before the fateful DWH disaster on 20 April. Together with three other BP directors, a total of unprecedented 531,461 BP shares were disposed off in the period 17 – 30 March 2010. What triggered off the massive BP shares sell off which did not include shares disposed by other BP top executives and Goldman Sachs? See BP massive shares selloff. Did Tony Hayward know something ahead of others as he did on 28 Oct 2009 on the problems Well A had?
We were all led to believe that oil giants like BP had stringent safety policies and standards to prevent this sort of disaster. The congress hearings and investigations had so far shown BP to be seriously lacking in all aspects of any respectable level of standards. What you are about to read will blow your mind more than the actual DWH blowout itself.
2. Some Key Points from Part 1
In the “Art of Mass Deception – part 1”, we have already shown that Well A could not be the well that was drilled when the 20 April blowout occurred. We also showed that the 5,000 ft long riser string could not have fallen intact with the BOP still attached to Well A. If the riser was leaking oil-gas from Well A, the flow has to be from south to north to the leak point at S20BC. Yet all the video footage showed the gas-oil to be flowing from the north. BP cannot change this fact now. If the leaking pipe was already severed on the southern end at S20BC, how could the oil-gas still be flowing to S20BC in the north from Well A in the south ?
To those who still think that BP’s management had acted in good faith and responsibly, there is no need to waste your time by reading any further. To those knuckleheads at TOD who thought they had widely ridiculed and debunked my geohazards theories and diagrams, I am sorry to say the last laugh is on them. They had been the ones who swallowed “line and hook”, from BP without even a second thought on the reasonability of the lies presented to them.
Can they honestly call themselves experts in their own field of specialization be it drilling, reservoir engineering or petroleum geology (or whatever) if they can be so badly duped by BP? They can’t even see the forest for the trees. Yet they want to debunk a lowly shallow geohazards specialist from a third world country who could correctly predict “the well that never was” which blew up right in front of their faces. Readers please go to the TOD blogs and witness for yourself the intimate and lengthy details of supposedly intelligent discussions on how to kill the Zombie Well that refused to lay dead. Why? Because that Zombie Well (Well A) had never been drilled down to TD (target depth) or reservoir. No wonder it can never be killed. The depths of Well A and Well B had never exceeded 12,900 ft bml. Check BP’s drilling records.
Only “the well that never was” (S20BC) reached the reservoir and blew up. The reason there is still so much gas and oil in the gulf today despite BP’s denial, is because S20BC’s top hole was badly damaged by the second explosion 2 days later after the initial blowout that caused the fire on DWH. The initial blowout was caused by gas influx from the EGCP (extended gas charged pressure) that had built up within the GWSF (gas-saturated weak sub-formation) zone. See Why is BP's Macondo blowout so disastrous & beyond-patch-up? The second explosion that blew off the BOP and broke the lower fifth of the riser, resulted from a sudden high pressure surge of gas and oil from the reservoir when the bottom cement plug finally kaput (breached) big time.
In the-mystery-of-the-april-20-blowout-revealed and in The-art-of-mass-deception-part-1., one can logically see that the riser string (5,000 ft long) could not have fallen intact with the BOP still standing on Well A, twisted and bent backwards at an acute angle standing (inverted V) 1500 ft above the seabed. Why did the Oil experts at TOD keep their intellectual silence at the blatant ruse being played out by BP in containing the 3 oil leaks on the seabed? Where are your moral obligations (so often quoted in your TOD blogs) to educate those outside the oil industry on the mass deception being perpetrated by BP?
Simple logic dictates that if the 3 leaks on the riser were due to oil-gas gushing out of the punctured holes, the riser closer to source could have been cut to reduce the 3 leaks into 1 controllable situation. It is amazing to us common folks with only common sense to see that BP could have easily fitted the LRMP within the first month if BP had wished to do so. The only reason 3 containment domes were necessary is because the leaks were coming from the ground and not from the leaking riser as BP had wanted us to believe. Tsk-Tsk! It is excusable for us non-oil experts without 30 years of expertise in the oil industry to be duped by BP. But TOD, the top blog on expert discussion on oil matters? That is inexcusable; unless of course your silence was bought. In which case, you have waived your rights to comment and insult others.
Surprise! Surprise! Surprise! Those three leaks that BP had reported initially and had sincerely wanted to contain using the 3 containment domes (until the hawks won over) were actually the three leaking wells drilled by BP. I don’t suppose you have the audacity to ask why? BP’s credibility and trustworthiness are already beyond redemption. If BP admitted to drilling 2 wells when they had claimed to be drilling only one, BP would be torn to pieces in the Congressional hearing. Now the whole world would be shocked that BP had been playing footsie with a third well that actually killed 11 and injuring others (?). Would that not be criminal? So why have you knuckleheads kept your silence at TOD? Are you not knowledgeable enough to voice up this obvious flaw for justice or does your silence speak volume of the bias towards the oil giant?
BP’s only sincere recovery effort in this whole fiasco, was the immediate response plan was to contain the gas-oil leaks at 3 seafloor locations using giant containment domes measuring 14 x 24 x 40 ft and weighing 125 tons. But by the time the first of the 3 domes was transported to site, that sincere effort had all melted away. The giant dome was parked on the seabed away from the spill area. On 8 May BP announced they had abandoned this containment approach due to the purported formation of methane hydrate crystals inside the dome. Efforts to place it over the main leak point were suspended at the weekend as a built-up of hydrates prevented a successful placement of the dome over the spill area. Excuse me, but how did the hydrates form inside the dome when it was not even placed over the gas leak yet? Isn’t this just a lame excuse?
It is criminally disgusting the way BP is allowed to carry on the charade and none of the Oilman expert at TOD (the so called vanguards of the oil industry) stood up to say a word. The thousands of Americans who spoke up against BP certainly have more guts than you guys at TOD.
BP would rather let the open well S20BC gush and poison the whole gulf with oil than admit its wrongdoings. BP would rather install the “busily travelling BOP” over well A and mesmerize the world’s attention to the gushing well while it sneakily poisons the gulf with Corexit to disperse the oil gushing out of S20BC, the well that never was. With Americans who would rather poison their own environment and condemn their own American citizens living in the gulf regions to the ranks of the walking dead, who needs Saddam Hussein as the enemy?
You should be ashamed of yourselves (Oilman experts at TOD) that a lowly shallow geohazards specialist from a third world country shows more concern about the gulf disaster and its impact on the lives of innocents. Despite all the evidence of fraud committed against the American people, you still unabashedly and blindly using your knowledge and expertise to drown out the voices of common logic and reasons against the atrocities committed by the selfish few.
How can the relief wells drilled down to 18000 ft bml, be the ultimate weapon to kill well A when well A was shallower than 13000 ft bml? Why must it take at least 3 months to drill each relief well when a normal well to 18000 ft bml took just 4 weeks to drill at S20BC (at an average rate of 580 ft per day)? See Mike William’s Interview with 60-minutes.
No, for all purposes and intent, the relief wells were drilled to kill the real rogue well drilled at S20BC, not Well A which many already suspected was the wrongly capped well. The proof is in the pudding. Just when the relief wells were tens of feet away from their target, BP’s top commanders are now dragging their feet on their “ultimate kill well” weapon. What happens? Were the relief wells just a diversion to buy time? In the hope the rogue “well that never was” (S20BC) would have depleted itself or at least died down substantially for the relief wells to work. It has been many months since any video footage of the oil-gas gush at S20BC was shown. Is the oil-gas gush still as strong as in day 1? What is the real story on the relief wells themselves? Was Relief D having as much trouble as Well A and Well B at the shallow GWSF zone? Was Relief Well C having as much trouble as S20BC at the lower part of the well? BP has to be more transparent to redeem itself.
Many who had correctly analysed BP’s illogical recovery efforts that appear to be stalling like a bumbling novice rather than the professional technological giant it is, knew and predicted BP’s relief wells were not what BP had made them out to be. They were all part of BP’s Art of Mass Deception. That was why Independent experts gave the Relief wells less than 30% chance of success in achieving their “bogus” objectives. Why were TOD’s experts touting BP’s official line that the Relief wells were the ultimate kill well weapons? That so many of our predictions had come true surely must vindicate our qualitative geological model shown in Why is BP's Macondo blowout so disastrous & beyond-patch-up? So which of my predictions and geological models are comical, nonsensical or garbage as ridiculed by TOD oil experts in their blogs?
It is now clear whose professional reputation and credibility is at stake and on the brink of being totally annihilated.
Being Independent and giving valid professional opinions is definitely far more credible and professional than those TOD experts who had prostituted their high moral grounds and expert knowledge.
3. BP’s Seven Magical Attempts To Kill A Zombie Well that refused to lay dead.
If you think, you have been had with the above fairy tale version of “BP’s Seven Magical Attempts To Kill A Zombie Well”, then you are right. BP’s Art of Mass Deception is a Gulf Oil movie production brought to the world’s stage with millions of unsuspecting victims and this reality show is as real as it can get with millions of dead fishes and wildlife thrown in. BP would have proudly promulgated that “No person, animal or wildlife were harmed in anyway in the production of this movie” if not for 11 dead crew and the dedicated work of thousands highlighting the atrocities of BP’s Killing Fields of the Gulf. How the world got duped by BP’s Art of Mass Deception is another complete story by itself. It is almost unbelievable that one of the world’s largest exploration companies would indulge in such a charade. This following section will help you understand why.
Deception works well in isolation and modern advanced society is a perfect victim. The best technological minds would be too highly specialised and absorbed in their own field of work to notice the blatant deception being played out by the mass media. Like most animated movies, BP had the technological advantage to play the high tech game of “Hide and Virtual Reality” leaving outsiders lost and confused. Any piercing enquiries into the disaster would be blocked by the need to maintain technical and business confidentiality. BP’s army of bloggers is essential to out-blog and to drown out any threatening logical voice of opinion in the internet space, so that the public is kept bombarded with BP’s Bogus Press to keep the world numb to the realities of the disaster.
4 The Drilling Problems at Well-01 (aka Well A) in 2009
To understand why BP did what it had to do, we must go back to 2009. In the 2009 drilling campaign, the semi-sub rig (Marianas) drilled only 4023 ft in over one month from 7 Oct to 9 Nov. This means that the first well (Well-01 aka Well A) must have had a lot of problems in the GWSF zone since the expected duration to drill 18000 ft was only 3 to 4 weeks. Was Hurricane Ida a saving grace and a good excuse to hide BP’s huge embarrassment?
Surely the technological giant could have managed better than 4023 ft or 75% short of their target? In this high stake game of exploration, nothing is left to chance and achieving less than 25% is indeed a dismal record. Apparently the shallow drilling problems (within the first 4000 ft) were compounded by a NE-SW fault sub-cropping close to the seabed. Average drilling rate was less than 122ft per day.
Would a technological and market leader like BP admit defeat at the hands of Mother Nature? After spending probably more than 50 million USD, a public admission of failure would open a floodgate of enquiries on BP’s incompetence and ignorance, not to mention a big dent to BP’s ego and share value. Could BP publicly announce that it had spent more than 50 million USD and not even drilled beyond 4000 ft? If the shallow drilling problems had been so severe, why had BP not seen it coming? So either BP had not conducted a shallow geohazards survey or had totally ignored the shallow geohazards warnings? Either way BP was in the wrong. If BP had diligently followed the geohazards assessment, BP should have sued the geohazards contractor for the mistake. So why did BP take the tab silently?
It is as if BP had gone to Las Vegas and gambled away 50 million USD of their exploration partners’ and shareholders’ funds. Like all gamblers, with all commonsense knocked out of them, BP or rather the key prospect managers or directors needed to win back the money with one more throw of the dice. BP had to drill that damn hole at whatever cost even at the risk of lives. In this game of confidence, BP cannot afford to let any of the “cats out of the bag”. Chances are well-01 (the real Well A) would not have been properly sealed and abandoned in the rush to escape Hurricane Ida. That was why the drilling campaign in 2010 was destined to end as an utter failure. It had all the makings of a “mega disaster waiting to happen”; see my first article on Newsvine; The Root Causes of BP's oil-spill back in 8 July 2010. The best drillers in the world could not have prevented the blowout on 20 April from happening.
5 Third Strike And You Are Out.
BP’s disastrous blowout at S20BC on 20 April came after 2 near-misses at Well A and Well B. Even for the most stubborn gamblers, these two near-misses should have warranted a thorough reassessment of the battle plan instead of an obsessed bulldozing drive to a certain head-on collision. All international safety policies require a thorough investigation and review of project operation plans before proceeding. I can quote no less than 20 major projects where such a Halt-Review-Reassess break of opportunity had averted disasters in the nick of time. I can also quote a few which had blatantly ignored accurately predicted geohazards that ended in disasters.
Was the need to cover individual mistakes of the past, selfish greed and pride, the fundamental cause of BP’s evidently very bad judgment and incessant drive to drill that damn Macondo well, come rain, hell or sunshine? See for yourself the evidence contained in the following timeline of key events leading to the disaster. No one until recently realised there was a third “well that never was (S20BC)” so “well B” was assumed to be the last well that blew on 20 April 2010.
Notes:
6 Conclusion
If BP’s exploration management had any safety consideration and common sense, they would not have directed TransOcean DWH to reenter well A which they already knew was a nightmarish hole. Even if BP had directed the drilling contractor out of sheer ignorance, the least they could have done was to highlight and caution Transocean’s drilling crew the expected problems, hazards and precautions based on their month long nightmare experience at well A from 7 Oct to 9 Nov 2009. If Transocean had accepted the assignment after all the safety cautions (as per required safety pre-drilling briefing) then Transocean had to accept some of the blame in drilling a hell hole.
In typical BP fashion, they “conveniently forgot” to inform MMS that BP was drilling from new surface locations at Well B and Well S20BC. It would not have mattered if there had been no disastrous blowout or fire onboard DWH that killed 11 crews. Things would have been quietly covered up as before. With billions in the cost of disaster recovery and litigation hinge on the balance, BP had no choice but to cover-up and hide the truths. In doing so, BP had willfully obstructed justice and violated many laws of the country in addition to those committed prior to the disaster.
Having drilled the wells without proper authorization, BP had to keep up the charade especially since the only escape joint liability clause in the joint-venture partnership with Anadarko & Mitsui, was “willful negligence by BP”. Many would question why BP did not abandon the wells despite the numerous red flags. Would a gambler refrain from throwing his last dice in the futile attempt to win back his lost fortune?
In the next installment of the “Art of Mass Deception” series, we will examine why the relief wells were never meant to bottom kill Well A or Well B which had never been drilled down to reservoir level. Only well S20BC reached the oil-gas reservoir at slightly over 18,000 ft bml. Was it a coincidence the 3 leaks on the seabed coincided with Well A, Well B and the “well that never was-S20BC”. S20BC is the largest and most difficult to control since it was the only one with the direct vertical conduit (well) to the reservoir. Oil from the reservoir flows to wells A and B through a myriad of pathways. In addition, all the three wells probably had continuous gas supply from the 176’ thick gas-charged, low-permeability siltstone in the Rob E-age target, reported in Texaco’s Rigel Well. There are several more leaks through the NE-SW fault line passing through both Well A and Well B locations. See figure 112.1.
BP’s “Seven Attempts to Kill A Zombie Well” were all part of the stage play in the attempt to buy time in the grand finale of “Now you see Now you don’t”. Stay tuned.
