Ever heard of fracking?

FluffyMcDeath

Active Member
Member
Joined
May 17, 2005
Messages
12,256
Reaction score
2,693
No, it's not a perversion (or maybe it is, perhaps I've jumped the gun on defending it!!)
It's a means for getting the natural gas out of coal beds that would otherwise be non-producing. It works by forcing high pressure fluids into the rock to create fractures that the gas can then flow along.

In Alberta it has produced natural gas and also made the water table fall far from where it would be useful for growing crops or other frivolities. For communities that depend on ground water it also has produced tap water that is opaque as well as having other magical properties.

[youtube:16bsc63o]XMS8VsG2LSY[/youtube:16bsc63o]
 
Can you imagine a plumber trying to solder on a new section of copper pipping? Not good.
 
1. Fresh water is only found at shallow depths
2. Water becomes more brackish as depth increase
3. Fracs are designed to stay withing the production zone, leaving the production zone, waists LOTS of money, and reduces production by bringing in unwanted (salt) water.
4. Lots of money is spent evaluating zone isolation before the frac is started so money is not waisted fracking out of zone.
5. This was investigated and found to be naturally occurring dissolved methane, not natural gas

Dissolved methane in well water appears to be biogenic in origin. Tests were positive for iron related bacteria and sulfate reducing bacteria. There are no indications of oil & gas related impacts to water well.
 
metalman said:
3. Fracs are designed to stay withing the production zone, leaving the production zone, waists LOTS of money, and reduces production by bringing in unwanted (salt) water.
4. Lots of money is spent evaluating zone isolation before the frac is started so money is not waisted fracking out of zone.
Deep Water drilling is perfectly safe. The industrial nature of design has proven this. Clearly lots of money is spent ensuring that leaks and mishaps don't occur else lots of product will be lost and wated. Therefore it's 100% perfect and it'll never go wrong. :roll:

Come on man if you should have learned anything by now it is there is no such thing as infallibility. (I'd even argue for those religous types in our midst to consider the most perfect being ever to exist creations are fallible. The diety simply declared fallibility a virtue.)

The important part of the statement is the proof that this particular instance the cause wasn't from fracking.
 
Cigarettes don't cause cancer. The issue was thoroughly investigated and no link was found.
 
faethor said:
Deep Water drilling is perfectly safe. The industrial nature of design has proven this. Clearly lots of money is spent ensuring that leaks and mishaps don't occur else lots of product will be lost and wated.

Deep water drilling in inherently risky. :roll: Deep-water drilling is a high-stakes game. There's geologic risk, technical risk, engineering risk, environmental risk, capital risk and market risk. The well is designed with triple fail safes & redundancies.

Of 18 other offshore oil well blowouts in the Gulf of Mexico the cause of all 18 oil well blowouts was gas cut (lightened / thinned) drilling mud while drilling. When drilling through an oil & gas bearing zone, the drilling mud becomes gas cut (mud weight reduced) and thinned (mud viscosity reduced). Defoamers are added to the drilling mud and then new mud is circulated into the well as the gas cut mud is circulated out the wellbore.

In this case the drilling was completed and the production casing was being cemented in place, and plugs were being set, to temporally abandon the well and move the drill ship away.

This well had been giving major lost circulation problems drilling all the way down. Heavy weight mud was required to contain bottom hole pressure, (16ppg+ mud weight). BP was cementing in place a long string of 7" production casing, run on drill pipe and hung off on the wellhead on the sea floor, like a "liner". They cemented this casing with a special lightweight foam cement containing nitrogen because they had lost circulation several times during drilling operations. The execution of a foam cement job are very complex, in order that you neither let the well flow from too little hydrostatic pressure nor break it down and lose the fluid and cement from too much hydrostatic. On the outside of the top joint of casing is a seal assembly - "packoff" - that sets inside the subsea wellhead and seals. This was set and tested to 10,000 psi, then a temporary "bridge plug" was run in on drill pipe to set somewhere near the top of the well bore and below the sea floor. This was the second redundant barrier. It is not know if this was actually set or not. At the same time they displaced the 16+ ppg mud from the the riser and replaced it with sea water so that they could pull the riser, off the BOP, lay it down, and move the drill ship off. When they did this, they dropped the hydrostatic pressure on the well. This was the plan since the well was plugged both on the inside with the casing and on the outside with the tested packoff. But something broke loose, gas and oil rushed up the riser; there was little wind, and a gas cloud hung over the rig. When the air intakes of the diesel engines sucked in the natural gas, they revved up until they exploded. This set everything on fire. Another engine explosion in the mud pit / mud pump room blew the mud pumps overboard. Another in the mud sack storage room, next to the living quarters, took out all the interior walls where the drilling crew was hanging out having a party to celebrate 7 years of accident free work on this rig.

In this case either Haliburton pumped too much salt water at the end of the cement job, so there was no bottom plug at the end of the casing, a miscalculation of fluid displacement volume by the operator of the pump or the foam cement failed. It will never be known for sure, the relief well will bury everything in concrete.
 
metalman said:
In this case either Haliburton pumped too much salt water at the end of the cement job, so there was no bottom plug at the end of the casing, a miscalculation of fluid displacement volume by the operator of the pump or the foam cement failed. It will never be known for sure, the relief well will bury everything in concrete.

It seems from witness testimony that the blame lies with BP. The Halliburton man in charge did not want to swap out the mud. The BP guy overruled him. BP wanted the operation wound up faster and swapping out the mud before the last plug saved a day (and a few bucks).

That was the directly precipitating event. However, it is known that this well had trouble going back weeks before it blew. There is no way of knowing if things would ultimately have worked out better if the Halliburton guy had won that day, but as it sits, liability seems to be with BP.

Earlier BP had also decided to use a cheaper well casing. That didn't help. Then there are all the known issues with the BOP that prevented pressure testing and ultimately failed to close in the event.
 
FluffyMcDeath said:
metalman said:
In this case either Haliburton pumped too much salt water at the end of the cement job, so there was no bottom plug at the end of the casing, a miscalculation of fluid displacement volume by the operator of the pump or the foam cement failed. It will never be known for sure, the relief well will bury everything in concrete.

It seems from witness testimony that the blame lies with BP. The Halliburton man in charge did not want to swap out the mud. The BP guy overruled him. BP wanted the operation wound up faster and swapping out the mud before the last plug saved a day (and a few bucks).

That was the directly precipitating event. However, it is known that this well had trouble going back weeks before it blew. There is no way of knowing if things would ultimately have worked out better if the Halliburton guy had won that day, but as it sits, liability seems to be with BP.

Earlier BP had also decided to use a cheaper well casing. That didn't help. Then there are all the known issues with the BOP that prevented pressure testing and ultimately failed to close in the event.

several people, made one or more mistakes that resulted in this disaster.

Anadarko considers suing BP over "gross negligence or wilful misconduct”.

Normally once the float collar is bumped at the end of the cementing operation, you would keep the mud in place for 12 hrs, until cement has cured, then run a wireline cement evaluation log, to determine the quality of the cement job. Especially in a case where you lost circulation drilling, had wash outs or did not have full returns during cementing, or the float did not hold when the plug was bumped at the end of the cementing job, or used a specialized cement prone to failure (e.g. nitrogen foam cement)

Seems BP ignored multiple warnings not to displace mud.

casinglayout.jpg


Don't see a problem with casing grades. All the casing is P-110,Q-125, or s-135 grade, Seems they ran a "tapered liner" 9 5/8" to a 7" shoe, probably why the float didn't hold.
 
Back
Top