Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Big Dog's Boom Boom Room -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Archie Meeties who wrote (134762)	6/13/2010 8:04:16 AM
From: Aggie	3 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 206204

Hi Archie Meeties, "Strikes me that the only variables you need to know to get an accurate measurement of oil flow are..." This is the empirical part of estimating blowout rate that I referred to yesterday. Given formation pressure and well's physical dimensions (hole size, casing sizes, depths, etc) and the fluid properties (all known), yes the calculation of flow rate is eminently estimable and a straight forward calculation. One can even take the known information about the reservoir and extrapolate an expected depletion rate. But what about when the flow path is unknown? What if the flow path is up the outside of the casing, following the scenario which I believe is the case (parted production casing, blown seal assembly). What if those dimensions are changing over time, as a product of continued flow? Since we know nothing about these physical aspects, we can only attempt to frame the question and estimate a range of possible flow rates - and this margin of error would be substantial. Without doing any work, I could easily see how the rate using this methodology could double or triple across this range. You'll note that nobody has stated it - but everyone's assumption here has been that the well flow has been a constant. I would not make that assumption. Regards to all Aggie <Edit>: The relief wells have a very high probability to be successful, and are the only way to positively kill this well. It must be done from the reservoir up. To minimize the risk of broaching the well (i.e. creating more losses to the formation, potentially breaching the seabed), they will need to bring another rig over the top, remove the Horizon's LMRP and install a new BOP on top. Don't forget that this well had problems with mud losses back up the hole. They will be contending with this problem during the well kill. It is a key risk. They have to be able to measure returning volumes and pressures to understand where the kill fluid is going. Having a second rig will mitigate (not eliminate) the possibility that downhole damage to the wellbore becomes a factor in the well kill, and it will allow a greater degree of control and certainty over the process. Best of all, it will allow that rig to proceed immediately with the proper abandonment of the Macondo well under controlled conditions. Of course the risks associated with having a rig in harm's way are significant.