Yes, I understand the hydrate (I think you all call it)
No. Hydrate production is a totally different process. What is being discussed is the natural gas that is dissolved in the oil
expands up to 100X's its below ground volume. That is why I repeatedly stress the importance/necessity of having a large pathway for the oil/gas to flow to. I then suggested that there be a manifold attached to the pipe below the surface to separate the gas from the oil before it reaches the surface. Alternatively you could construct a dome (much like used over a Tennis court in winter) over the area where the riser comes to the surface.
And you have been repeatedly told that this is not feasible. Instead, the oil mitigation is being performed with actual, existing equipment that has been developed over the years to specifically deal with oil and gas conveyance.
I accepted a long time ago that the three to four month relief well process is the only way to relieve the pressure at this site enough to seal this well casing off.
Then you have misunderstood the process. The intent is not to relieve the pressure, but to stop the flow at the reservoir by applying back pressure by means of the hydrostatic head of the kill mud.
My problem/emphasis has always been that we should be gathering as much oil as possible,
Neither you nor I are in a position to say that BP is not. The fact that the current containment is not as effective as all would like is also demonstrated by BP as it is a temporary solution and a more permanent one, with potentially better/total containment is being deployed.
as close as possible to where it is exiting the seabed.
It is being collected at the WELLHEAD.
You cannot get any closer to where the well is exiting the seabed, it IS the exit.
I see from their diagrams that they have three large dispersant tanks set up on the sea floor which are apparently feeding dispersant right into the stream of oil spewing into the Gulf. When wayward Hayward said not to worry the Gulf is a huge body of water it was not a gaff or a mis-statement, he was expressing what has been the dominant attitude that I have had so much problem with through this whole disaster.
While not dismissing the awful environmental impact that this spill is having, it can be argued that dispersant treated oil in the ocean is better that untreated crude.
Anyone who says that BP has been honest and forthright with the estimates is either clueless or hasn't been paying attention. First a thousand barrels a day, then five thousand/day then I think it was nine to twelve thousand/day, then twelve to nineteen thousand/day, then eighteen to twenty-five thousand/day and oh yeah, there would likely be a 20% or more increase when they cut the riser, then we are at twenty-five to forty thousand/day now we are at thirty-five to sixty thousand barrels per day. Can you not detect a pattern here?
Yes, as more information is gathered, so the estimates become more real.
From before day one of this spill BP knew what the pressures were of this well. They also had a very good idea of the fields volume and the flow which could be achieved through the drill string.
No they did not. If this was known there would have been no need to drill two exploration wells on the structure. The reasoning is in the naming of the wells.
They have been responding with wishful thinking when it comes to their estimates of flow and their chances of success for the top hat, top kill, etc. etc...If you ask me they should not even be allowed to drill a block of wood on dry land!
From their site I also see they have two vertical risers attached to piping/hose which is hooked into the BOP and is bleeding off some of the oil/gas to ships above.
This is a secondary purpose. This was originally installed for the top kill.[/quote] It just boggles my mind that BP did not admit from the start that they were in over their heads either that or they failed to somehow see that every gallon of oil they capture at the sea floor is a gallon that doesn't destroy habitat, beach front or kill living organisms.[/quote]Where did they ever say that this would be easy or that they didn't care if oil entered the GoM?
They call for ideas or perhaps they were forced to call for ideas, it doesn't matter. Then they say we have received to many to look at. Are they serious? Back to the block of wood on dry land! If they received to many to look at then share the ideas with the online community, they can sort them and simplify the review process remarkably for the engineers.
In my opinion this was a PR exercise aimed at the reality TV hungry USA. It worked to some degree by diverting attention away from the event, but I doubt it was ever going to be useful.
Consider some of the layman's suggestions on this thread.
It requires engineering expertise and in particular oil and gas engineering experience to solve this problem. Most people don't have the expertise required to grasp the enormity of the problem and the engineering, technology and manufacturing required to even think about approaching this problem.
I understand the volatility,
I don't believe you do. Tey are flaring 45 MILLION cubic feet of gas a day at current rate.
are you saying that problem can't be engineered safely? Then maybe it is time to stop all drilling til they can prove they know what they are doing.
No. Implementing your "solution" would introduce uncontrolled oil and gas at the surface of the GoM where vessels and people are work. Currently the flow to surface is controlled.
They have known since late April or early May that the relief wells were the only way to reduce the flow enough to seal this leak. They also knew it would be three to four months before they were completed. So yes they did have plenty of time to lay a pipe, or fabricate a properly sized riser.
No. Steel for this construction cannot be conjured up from thin air. The delivery time on the steel required alone would be months.
Instead, they are deploying existing, real-world, equipment specifically designed for the oilfield.
If engineered properly I would be glad to.
I wouldn't approach a leaking gas stove with a match, yet you'd approach 45 MILLION cu.ft of natural gas in a vessel that has multiple ignition sources on it.
Again, you are demonstrating that you do NOT appreciate the hazards of working in the oilfield.
Why in the heck they insist on burning the gas is beyond me.
Again, demonstrating that you do not fully appreciate the situation.
Why aren't they capturing it?
Because there is no containment vessel available and the priority is to mitigate oil spilling into the GoM.
