Monday, April 11, 2011

three wells

There are definitely 2 well heads see this article

http://bklim.newsvine.com/_news/2010/11/11/5451924-deciphering-the-da-vinci-code-of-bps-well-deception

there are other evidences but for the die-hard shills like Thad Daly and Merita,  the pictures shown were chosen with the rov looking at the same orientation. Notice the color bands used to identify the wellheads. Beats me why None of the investigators and Congress Oversight committee ever put a question to BP.  Feel free to circulate to show how the lies are propagated in the so-called technical / scientific circles.


The third well (well head destroyed)  - http://bklim.newsvine.com/_news/2010/11/15/5468085-the-hole-truth-nothing-but-the-truth-on-the-3rd-hole



shows the operation recovering the well casing. One comment said they were repairing a pipeline ......give me a break.








On 11_Apr11 10:02 A reader wrote:
Looking at old BP videos: One other thought.

In looking at all the old BP videos I downloaded back then. It seems... The Wells Shown were all Different Well Heads. Which was proof of More then ONE WELL.

I will go through the Videos again and do a screen shot and show you that when they are talking about the Casing on the Well they show one Well Head then on another WELL they show a totally different Well Head.

This is why one well has has thick Black OIL gushing out and another has Fish swimming around the well head like seen on the CNN footage.

MY dad used to beat the shit out of us kids for lying. WE LEARNED NOT TO LIE. This is why I hate the Wars and such. 1000's die for others lies.
Yet American's would rather cover the lies and war crimes then face the truth then see America with a black eye. But when it comes to another country... They want the Sucker to HANG for his war crimes... Make Sense?

THEY CALL THIS JUSTICE.

Sunday, April 10, 2011

Part 1 - Mystery of the New Found Oil revealed


  • by BK Lim (first drafted in Nov2010, revised and updated 07 April 2011)
First of all the relief wells were unable to "bottom kill" or seal the real gusher (3rd well) at 18000ft below mudline. They could stop it momentarily but like applying band-aid to a high-pressured leaking hose, it comes off easily after a short while.

Much of the damage was done during the drilling itself. Shell had a blowout in the North Sea four months earlier (also on a Transocean rig) but could contain it even with all the accidental and random failures found at DWH. So what is difference in the Montara Oil Spill in the Timor Sea, off Australia and the DWH blowout at Macondo. For detailed explanation see
The root causes of bps oil spill the imminent threat of more oil related disasters part 1 
The high risk of capping bps gushing well from the top
There is a special geohazards condition which I termed it – Gas-saturated Weak SubFormation (GWSF) zone. Even if the blow-out does not occur during drilling, the potent mix of gas and brine causes havoc in the vicinity of the well bore and will prevent the well-bore annulus from being cemented and sealed fast to the formation walls. Thus a blow-out is imminent even after the well is completed, sometimes years later as in Shell Barton BT5 in 1990, Sabah offshore Malaysia. For the cement to hold and prevent hydraulic connections, the cement needs to set and bind completely with the formation walls. But with a gas-saturated weak formation especially in the sub-formation zone, the overlying sediment are not rock solid and prone to sub-seabed erosion and slow transport of sediment out into the water column above. The emphasis is on this top sub-formation zone because of the possible gas escape routes to the water column. It would be fine if the original gas accumulation depletes itself. But large and significant accumulation of gases generally mean inexhaustible supply via permeable deep-seated faults. In Macondo's case, the permeable adjacent of the salt intrusion, an Allochthonous Salt structure (see figures 150-1) added to the wells' nightmares.

If this top hole section cannot be secured, leaking problems can still develop years later, even after the well is long abandoned; depending on the rate of sub-seabed erosion. Most of the leaks in the old abandoned wells would have been rejuvenated by the abnormal quake swarms after months of gas and oil spewing out of the 3rd Macondo well until about mid-Sept 2010. As erosion progressively removes disintegrated sediment particles, porosity increases with mass depletion.

The fearsome scenario of a giant oil batholith swelling up the whole sea floor and exploding like an undersea magma volcano generating tsunami has no sound geological basis (figures 150-2 & 150-3). It was conjured up and propagated by pro-BP advocates to scare the public into surrendering their demands for justification and transparency, in return for BP to save them from such a nightmarish scenario. One of NOAA video on an undersea volcanic eruption was widely displayed in June 2010 to demonstrate the possibility of such a destructive scenario. Anyone watching the Alex Jones interview with Lindsay Wiliams would assume the submarine volcanic eruption was captured in the Gulf of Mexico. It was not.

That volcanic eruption was close to an active plate margin within the Pacific Ring of Fire, in the South Pacific 140 miles SW of Samoa. Its tectonic setting is nowhere similar to the Gulf of Mexico, a more stable intra-plate tectonic zone. The mechanism of a Mud Volcano is a world of a difference from the Magma Volcano. Whose idea was it to show a volcanic eruption to illustrate what was happening with the Macondo mud volcano in the Gulf? NOAA label was flashed in the brief video of the eruption with no explanation. According to Lindsay Williams, he was given the materials from high level sources which he could not disclose. It is unbelievable that the high level sources could not differentiate between a magma and a mud volcano. Was this technical deception planned as early as 2009?

Was a scarier eruptive scenario deliberately fed to the public, so that when the worst such as massive eruptions, seafloor collapse and giant tsunami did not come to pass, any notion of population reduction conspiracy or planned disasters for profit could be shot down readily by BP's cyber mercenaries?

Granted the industry's professionals are contractually obligated to keep their silence. But why are gulf truth advocates with claims to insiders' information keeping their silence on this clear deception since June 2010? Surely an ex-oilfield executive with a 25-year successful career, who claims to be a self-funded independent researcher and having spent more than 7 months researching on Project Gulf Disaster could not have overlooked this and other blatant fallacies of the Gulf Disaster?


Yet the one exposing at least 20 such distorted truths on the gulf disaster be accused of being on BP's payroll, misleading the public, controlling the opposition (gulf activism) and preventing his brand of truth from reaching a wider audience? What good would an ex-oilfield executive truth advocate be, if he is so willfully ignorant of all the facts and only regurgitating what is already publicly known and promulgated by the main stream media?

Instead of endless supply of oil, gas and mud with expanding and swelling seabed due to increasing pressure, the reverse is true. Like popping a champagne bottle, the initial burst is at the highest pressure. What or where is the source of increasing pressure? It is such simple fundamental question that guides us through a minefield of geophysical impossibilities on the path of Truth Reporting. If companies are not required by law to have their accounts audited by registered accountants, would major corporations be responsible enough to declare their profits truthfully?

Thus a mass depletion model, whereby the eroded sediment are continuously transported by the escaping corrosive fluid (gas-brine mix) through the fractured or faulted pathways, is more plausible than the “oil batholith-volcanic eruption model” initiated by BP. Who else could and would spend millions of dollars promulgating such horse-shit?

The presence of extensive methane hydrate within the Quaternary sediment of the Gulf increases the rate of mass depletion. The escaping gas and brine create new pathways to the seabed. Hot oil from the reservoir follows and get trapped at the sub-formation zones, beneath the Quaternary deposits with the stable hydrates. Warmed-up hydrates vaporise into gaseous methane which in turn provide endless supply of gas, and together with brine, further erode and increase the permeability of these new pathways to the seabed. Shale and mudstone beds which are normally impermeable to either gas or oil, easily disintegrated on contact with fluid consisting of gas and brine (technical publication in prep).

Eventually, with higher permeability and porosity the oil seeps higher and closer into the seabed. The proliferation does not spread uniformly in radial pattern. For obvious reasons, the erosion process proliferates preferentially along the major fault lines and at the edges of the salt structures and the continental shelf edges.
Follow the faults and canyons radiating from the Macondo prospect and you will find the gas seepage and oil accumulation beneath the Quaternary beds. So Matt Simmons' assertion that there were major gas and oil leaks 7 miles from the Macondo wells was not far-fetched after all. Our observations showed that all the 3 drilling rigs ( DD2, DD3 and DE) had spent considerable period of time at the shelf-edges of the Salt domes / Continental slopes. Why?

With no ROV videos we can only speculate but then there were not too many options for BP. Either they were drilling shallow wells to grout the growing fractures in the faults and precarious edges of the salt domes or were fanatically pumping in even more dispersant so that the leaking oil would stay submerged. A sea of floating oil in the vicinity of the Macondo wells would definitely not look good. No matter how much PR cosmetics were applied, a massive oil slick would be highly unconvincing of a permanently sealed well.
BP had hoped that by grouting the fissures, vents and faults around the Macondo wells, the still escaping oil and gas would disperse far and wide beneath the seafloor, far enough to absolve further blame of future oil spills such as the one observed on 18 March 2011.

Though fully aware of the sub-seabed erosion process, BP reckoned it would take more than a few years before sufficient oil could accumulate at shallow depths to pose a problem. By then the Macondo Blowout would be a distant memory. It would be too absurd in the minds of the innocent Public, to connect any new oil spills to the disastrous Macondo blowout. But BP probably underestimated the abnormal rapid rate of sub-seabed erosion aided by the endless supply of methane gas from the extensive occurrence of hydrates and the effect of the mass depletion (vaporisation, disintegration of the clayey beds containing the hydrates sediment structure and erosion/transportion of the disintegrated clay sediment).

Worse. Many of the major deep-seated faults cut through other oil reservoirs which might have been indiscriminately damaged from the thousands of wells drilled in the last decade. Many of these faults were already leaking or on the verge of leaking. The recent quake swarms, though small in magnitude are shallow and quite effective in hastening the sub-seafloor erosion process. Once leakage to the many marginal uneconomic reservoirs are established more light crude migrate to the shallower sub-seabed zones. The new shallow oil accumulation need not necessarily originate from the Macondo prospect.

An example of this effect is demonstrated by the observed large gas bubble near at the coastguard base in Louisiana on 22 April 2010, the day of the second underwater explosion which brought down the Deepwater Horizon. The huge gas release occurred due to the vibration of the second explosion which fractured the overburden sediment capping an existing shallow gas accumulation 40 miles away. The NW-SE fault zones passing through the Macondo prospect to the coastguard base, facilitated the transmission of pressure pulses, just like any hydraulic system used in our machines.

The Stage Is Set and Nature refuses to play ball.
As more oil from the reservoir seeps to the sub-formation, more hydrates in the stable zone vaporised and caused even more erosion over a wider area. Unlike gas, oil can only migrate through the more permeable pathways and accumulate at the more porous and sandy beds. Any oil seepage by its natural pressure would mean near-saturation in oil bearing capacity of the shallow emplacement (high porosity sand, turbidites and deltaic formation intercepted by the highly fractured eroded faulted pathways). Continual or periodic oil seeps start the accumulated differential pressure is sufficiently high to overcome the combine weight (pressure) of the overburden and water column. Alternatively, the buried oil accumulation can be released through a major tectonic event since Quaternary sediment are quite fragile and easily fractured once the corrosive gas and brine erosion processes had taken their toll.

If the 9.0 mag quake in Japan had occurred months earlier, the new shallow oil emplacement would have been insufficient to cause such a large area of oil slick. To refute arguments that these shallow oil emplacement existed before the 20 April 2010 blowout, there was no report of widespread oil slick following the 24 Dec 2004 Sumatra (9.0), 12 Jan 2010 Haiti (7.0) and 27 Feb 2010 Chile (8.8) quakes.

By the time of the 4 Sept Canterbury (7.1) NZ, 29 Sept Papua Indonesia (7.2), 21 Dec Bonin Islands Japan (7.4) and 25Dec Vanuatu, S Pacific (7.3) quakes occurred, the gulf waters were again sufficiently clear of surface oil (oil dispersed and submerged) for any new oil slick to be noticed. Again none was reported. The recent 18 Feb 2011 quake off Fort Morgan Alabama (3.5 mag) was probably too weak and too far NE from the main erosion and migration oil pathways (the fault zones striking through Louisiana) to trigger any substantial release of oil into the water column.

By the beginning of this year, tar balls (nickel to palm size) and dollar-sized sandy patches of oil were reportedly washing up in Grand Isle and Louisiana coast to Alabama beaches at Fort Morgon. Towards the end of March 2011, there had been increasing reports of new oil related sightings at the beaches of Louisiana. These are significant evidences of periodic or regular oil seeps coming out of the seabed, not from a single point oil spill (some fundamental reasons in part 2 of this article). It also means the oil migration pathways were filled to the brim and ripe for major simultaneous releases on a tectonic trigger with a much lowered threshold.


The mayor's office said tar balls are coming ashore on Elmer's Island and sand dollar-sized patches of oil are washing up in Grand Isle. The environmental group Louisiana Bucket Brigade said it was the worst instance of oil contamination since the BP oil spill.

4 Jan 2011 Gulf Oil Spill Tarballs Continue To Wash Ashore On Fort Morgan, Alabama Beach
BP cleanup crews returned to work Monday after a 10 day break, WKRG reports, and they seem to have their work more than cut out for them. Tarballs have been washing up all along the shores of Alabama's Fort Morgan beach.

According to the Press-Register, they range in size from as small as a nickel to as large as a person's palm. The tarballs are so plentiful on the beach that they are seldom more than an inch apart from each other on shore.

22 March 2011 Oil, tar balls wash ashore on Louisiana coast 
Emulsified oil, oil mousse and tar balls from an unknown source have been washing up on beaches from Grand Isle to West Timbalier Island along the Gulf of Mexico, a stretch of about 30 miles, a Louisiana official said. It was still heading west Monday afternoon.


Intra-Plate Tectonic Setting.
You will notice that the Macondo prospect lies almost 150 miles SE from the southern tip of the New Madrid fault zone. Check out my previous articles to understand the Quaternary intra-plate tectonic setting and movement.
23 Feb 2011 shallow-earthquakes-associated-with-the-new-madrid-fault-bps-mega-oil-spill
10 Nov 2010 update-on-bp-rigs-location-fault-connection-10-nov-2010

The Macondo prospect is located approximately at the pivoting point of the intra-plate movement. The red and black dotted lines represent discernible faults obscured by the Quaternary sediment cover. Fundamental geotechnical principles dictate that there should be stress-induced faults and the step-like breaks at the shelf edge are give-away indications. Competent geologists from the oil companies would have noticed the fragility of the Salt-geology tectonic system. Exploration objectives however overrode geohazards concerns and environmental implications in the event of a disaster. It still is today.

The events unfolding from this mega-disaster confirm what geohazards experts had known and feared all along. Environmental and Safety concerns by oil companies are horse-shit for public consumptions only. What goes behind boardroom meetings is just the exact opposite.

Like a loaded spring, shallow quakes occurred in response to tensional releases following the prolonged erosion processes of uncontrolled oil and gas flows. Shallow quakes occur due to differential tensional forces caused by higher resistance at the generally younger Miocene formation and above. The shallow quakes also rejuvenated old fault lines and spread the sub-erosion process even wider. As the cycle repeats itself, leaks from abandoned wells and uneconomical-spent out reservoirs rejuvenated and accelerated along the weakened fault zones and precarious edges of the salt domes.

Yes BP underestimated the connected relationship between hydrates, faults, Quaternary Sediment and shallow earthquakes. The erosion rates were several factors faster than they had anticipated. Even before the 9.0 mag earthquake in Japan on 11 March 2011, scientists and research workers were already finding oily sediment buried beneath the seabed. We will come to this in part 2. Just 34 minutes after the giant quake, groundwater levels in South Florida fluctuate up to 3 inches for 2 hours (JapaneseQuake stirred Florida). P waves travelled through the earth at a much faster speed.

New 10 x 100 miles oil spill spotted after Japanese 9.0 mag Earthquake.
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/possible-new-oil-spill-100-10-miles-reported-gulf-mexico
Independent pilots, including John Wathen of the Waterkeeper Alliance, and Bonnie Schumaker with Wings of Care, are currently flying out to investigate the spill. Schumaker reports having seen the sheen on Friday, March 18, and confirms that it is rapidly expanding. A Louisiana fisherman, who has chosen to remain anonymous at this time, also reports fresh oil coming ashore near South Pass, LA, and that cleanup crews are laying new boom near the beach.
Initially the new oil spill was suspected to have come from the Matterhorn field operated by W&T Technology using the production rig, Matterhorn Seastar. The oil was suspected to have come from a leak in the producing well. The Matterhorn field is located approximately 20 miles north of the Deepwater Horizon rig.

A couple of days later, a Houston-based oil company came forward to accept responsibility for the mysterious spill near Grand Isle, although it says it remains "surprised" that what it thought was a minor discharge from a long dormant well could have produced miles-long slicks. The company said it had reconnected the wellhead structure Tuesday (22 March 2011) morning and fully shut it in by 8:30 p.m. The amount spilled was estimated to be less than 5 gallons.

This is probably the case of a convenient scapegoat who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Even if the company had underestimated the amount spilled, the accidental spill which was reportedly noted over the weekend (19 / 20 March) could not account for the 10x100 miles sheen reported on 18 March. The Matterhorn Seastar did not report any spill. As a fully operational production rig, any spill would be an immediate concern. So unless the crews were sleeping on their job, they would have alerted the coast guards as soon as the oil sheen reached visible size like 1 to 2 miles diameters. I do not think American oil workers could be that slack, not to notice until it was over 100 miles long. Elementary, Watson!

Anglo-Suisse Offshore Partners was caught in the act of an accidental spill but the timing and the amount spilled from a dead well could not account for the instantaneous sighting and extent of the observed spill; certainly not the tar-balls. Probably guilty of not reporting previous accidental spills, the guilty-conscious party jumped to admit responsibility. But are we truly happy with napping any culprit without ever knowing the true cause. Is justice truly served when the wrong corporation ends up taking the tab? Could Justice in America have sunk to the level of dictatorial 3rd world countries where an innocent can be sent to the gallows for justice to be seen to have been done? Surely not.

1 barrel of oil (US) is equivalent to 31.5 US gallons which is 7,276 cu.in. 10 x 100 miles is 1000 sq miles. So even if the oil is only 1 inch thick to produce the visible sheen from the air, that would mean 27,880,000,000 sq ft area or 4,014,720 million cu.inches of oil. Which means the “dead well” had to leak a total of 551,737,786 barrels of oil in a maximum of say 3 days. The rate of flow or leak would be an impossible 183,912,595 barrels per day. WOW! Even if the oil had been leaking for 7 days since the mega quake in Japan, that would still be a staggering 78.8 million barrels a day. So even if the oil sightings had been exaggerated, say only 1x1mile sheen, that would still mean the dead well had leaked 78,820 barrels/day for 7 days.

With such a fantastic production rate from a “dead well”, why was it dead in the first place and why would America need to import oil at all? For comparison, the Macondo well was initially reported to be gushing at only 5,000 barrels/day. Later it was revised to between 50,000 to 100,000 barrels/day. How many days did it take to reach the shores of Louisiana? Another clear example of Physics Of Impossibilities?


Even with a surface current of 3 knots (calm sea state is max 1 knot), it would have taken the oil 10 hours to reach the coast of Louisiana, 30 miles away. The company reported their crews have been monitoring the site since September and did not report any oil discharge until the end of last week. Even if the leak started on 18 March (Friday) the oil could not have been sighted simultaneously at the coast, 30 miles away. It would certainly take more than 30 hours for the oil leaking out from a single point to stretch 100 miles even assuming the volume and rate of leak can be justified. So either everyone is lying, exaggerating or the observed facts does not fit any one single source of leak. Simple logic dictates that there must have been simultaneous releases of oil spread over 100 miles rather than a single source. The long trauma of BP's mega oil spill had obviously taken a toll on rationality. Widely perceived to be inapt in handling the BP mega-oil spill, officials are quick to act and will grasp any illogical explanation, as if to compensate for past mistakes. Poor Anglo-Suisse!

But how could multiple oil releases be coordinated across 100 miles of ocean? Obviously the NW-SE fault zones played an important role in accumulating the shallow oil emplacement waiting to be triggered by an abnormal tectonic event. It is no coincidence the new oil spill was noticed just days after the 11 March11 Japan Earthquake.


What I have shown are simple basic quantitative estimates? Even if we reduced the 10x100 miles oil slick to just 1 sq mile, the leak from a single has to be staggering. Still physically impossible. Just because most of the oil exploration activities are offshore away from public scrutiny, many who were in charge of documentation thought they could easily fudge the data, dates, quantities etc mostly to cheat on time or to cover data which they had overlooked or had not acquired. There are plenty of examples. Just as the accumulated shallow oil will again be released by another quake, these data frauds and cheating will one day come back to bite us.

My purpose is not to ridicule but to illustrate a sleeping giant oil industry heavily intoxicated with high oil prices and greed. The bottom-line matters and corporate America is too high brow and too blind to see simple solutions and preventive measures at hand. Why would I risk my professional reputation in coming out with a qualitative geological model in late July 2010? Reading geohazardous conditions is not so difficult. It is the oil companies that are bullheaded in sidelining sound geohazards' advice and assessment. Even without detailed seismic data, a relatively accurate and reliable model can be estimated. The qualitative model turns out to be the most accurate todate – see figure 150-1.

Drilling risks can be assessed and minimised. Risk assessment is basically elimination of possibilities using quantitative estimates whenever possible. Geohazards prediction is not hoco-pocus, black magic art or voodoo science. The recent Japan Nuclear disaster could have easily been averted by locating all their nuclear plants on the north-western coasts, and not at the south-eastern coastline facing the greatest Tsunami threats. A quick look at the volcanic arc would show that locating a nuclear plant near to Sendai would be committing HaraKiri (excuse the term) if a mega quake were to occur.

Grossly expensive and grandiose schemes always proceed at bullet-train speed in their haste to beat the dateline and budget. Simple, logical and fundamental considerations get lost in the express-train schedule. With this Just-In-Time Business model, sadly the whole world is rushing towards another disaster......sigh!
The saga of Gulf 's Facts and Fictions ...continues
Part 2 - Mystery of the recent fish kills, mass bird deaths and other consequences of BP's Macondo BLOWOUT

Monday, April 4, 2011

New aerial images deepen concerns about Gulf seafood safety


New aerial images from the Gulf of Mexico are deepening concerns about whether seafood currently being harvested from those waters is safe to eat.


Share

Hurricane Creekkeeper John Wathen of Alabama flew over the Gulf on March 19 and 20 on a flight provided by On Wings of Care and videotaped what he saw. Though Wathen works for the Waterkeeper Alliance, he did this work on his own and does not speak for any group in the video.

His conclusion is sure to prove controversial.

"In my opinion," Wathen says, "nothing that's being caught in these waters today is safe for human consumption."

The federal Food and Drug Administration insists that Gulf seafood is safe to eat. "Although crude oil has the potential to taint seafood with flavors and odors caused by exposure to hydrocarbon chemicals, the public should not be concerned about the safety of seafood in stores at this time," the FDA states on its BP oil spill update page.

Wathen's flight took him from Alabama down to the Mississippi coast and west along the Louisiana coast. When he got to the Gulf, he witnessed the same strange purple color he saw in the water back in July and August of last year. He also caught faint whiffs of oil.

"Sheens coming in on the horizon that were miles long, rainbow on the water and this funny color of purple deep down inside," he says. "And yet there it was -- a shrimp boat with its nets in the water, catching shrimp to send to a table somewhere in Middle America where nobody sees what I see."

Wathen -- who recently received Wild South's Roosevelt-Ashe Society Conservation Award for Outstanding Journalist in Conservation -- says he's taken flak for talking publicly about what he's seeing and what he thinks it means. In his video, he assures viewers that it's not his aim to hurt fishermen or the Gulf region's economy.

But at the same time, he doesn't want people to be hurt by eating unsafe seafood.

"I think that whoever's responsible for this should be paying these people to take their boats out of the water until we can figure out what's going on," he says.

You can watch his video here:



Wathen isn't alone in raising concerns about recent images coming out of the Gulf. In a post made last week to its blog, the nonprofit group SkyTruth shared Google Earth photos that suggest shrimp trawlers are churning up oil that settled to the seafloor:

skytruth_trawling_oil.jpgMeanwhile, Vietnamese-American shrimpers in Mississippi have pulled up nets full of oil from the seafloor and "have had to decide whether to report the oil to the Coast Guard, which would mean dumping their day's catch, or pretend they don't see the oil," according to Courthouse News Service.

(Photo at top is a still from Wathen's latest video from the Gulf.)

user-pic
 0 Votes

WDSU report on Gulf activist: “Gunshot wounds to his forehead and torso” — Niece with “gunshot wounds to her neck and buttock”


LaPlace Shooting Injures 2, WDSU, April 3, 2011:
… The sheriff’s department said a 42-year-old man was found with gunshot wounds to his forehead and torso. Deputies said an 18-year-old woman was found with gunshot wounds to her neck and buttock. …
Investigators said the man apparently came back two more times, and after being told for a third time the person he was seeking didn’t live at the home, he fired shots at the house.
To help Tucker and his niece, visit the Mendoza Recovery Fund.

Report: Gulf activist shot 4 times through door of home, niece hit twice


Gulf oil rig owner apologizes for calling 2010 'best year' ever


By The CNN Wire Staff

April 4, 2011 -- Updated 1705 GMT (0105 HKT)
The SEC report revealed a $200,000 salary increase for Transocean President and CEO Steven L. Newman.
The SEC report revealed a $200,000 salary increase for Transocean President and CEO Steven L. Newman.
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
  • Transocean acknowledges words were "insensitive" in light of 11 worker deaths
  • Executives get pay raises, bonuses, in part for the safety record, SEC filing says
  • Cash awards based in part on company safety record
  • Despite Gulf oil spill, company called 2010 "best year in safety"
(CNN) -- The owner of the Gulf of Mexico oil rig that exploded last year, killing 11 workers and leading to what has been called the worst oil spill ever, said Monday that calling 2010 its "best year" in safety "may have been insensitive."
Transocean Ltd., in a recent filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, said hefty bonuses and raises to top executives were based in part on the company's "performance under safety" last year.
"We acknowledge that some of the wording in our 2010 proxy statement may have been insensitive in light of the incident that claimed the lives of eleven exceptional men last year and we deeply regret any pain that it may have caused," Transocean said in a statement to CNN. "Nothing in the proxy was intended to minimize this tragedy or diminish the impact it has had on those who lost loved ones. Everyone at Transocean continues to mourn the loss of these friends and colleagues."
The statement did not address the controversy over the decision to give out cash awards despite the oil spill disaster.
That includes a $200,000 salary increase for Transocean President and Chief Executive Officer Steven L. Newman, whose base salary will increase from $900,000 to $1.1 million, the SEC report said. Newman's bonus was $374,062, according to the report, which Transocean filed Friday.
Newman also has a $5.4 million long-term compensation package the company awarded him upon his appointment as CEO in March 2010, according to the SEC filing.
"Notwithstanding the tragic loss of life in the Gulf of Mexico, we achieved an exemplary statistical safety record as measured by our total recordable incident rate and total potential severity rate," the SEC statement reads. "As measured by these standards, we recorded the best year in safety performance in our company's history."
The company called that record "a reflection on our commitment to achieving an incident-free environment, all the time, everywhere," the SEC filing said.
The April 20, 2010, explosion on the Deepwater Horizon rig injured 17 workers and killed 11 others, including nine Transocean employees, according to the SEC filing. It has been called the worst spill in U.S. history. The well was capped three months later, but not before millions of barrels of oil spilled into the Gulf.
In January, President Barack Obama's National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling released a report that spread blame for the accident among Transocean, BP -- which leased the rig -- and Halliburton, which installed the rig's cement casing.
The commission said problems with deepwater drilling are "systemic" and that only "significant reform" will prevent another disaster.
Another report released March 23 determined that the oil spill was caused by a piece of drill pipe trapped in the rig platform's blowout preventer, a device intended to stop oil from flowing into the Gulf. The report was commissioned by various U.S. agencies, including the Interior Department and the Department of Homeland Security.
The Interior Department has said a much broader report that relies on additional sources of data, including eyewitness accounts and photos, will be released this summer.
The oil spill has prompted a flood of lawsuits against BP, Transocean and Halliburton from a variety of plaintiffs, including owners of Gulf businesses who say they suffered heavy financial losses because of the spill.
The plaintiffs also include Transocean shareholders who contend the company falsely claimed it had remedied past safety problems with its blowout preventers before the Gulf spill.

Monday, March 14, 2011

Some people just do not know when to give up


  • by BK Lim (14 March 2011)
By now it is very clear Thad Daly is not who he claims to be. He had claimed to be a mechanical engineer, fluid engineer and a drilling engineer at different times. Yet discrepancies in his biodata showed he could not possibly be any one of these professional. Chances are he is an out of work rigger, now working as a planted mole on cyberspace. I don't mean to be rude but this arrogant “pro-of-the-wrong-kind” needs to be shown what a jerk he is for going around hounding and belittling fellow bloggers genuinely concerned with the gulf disaster. Seek the proofs from BP. They have all the unadulterated and unscrambled video, not me or anyone else outside BP. We do not need another BP's schill to muddle the truth.

Some of Thad Daly's ranting:

And I have more respect than you could understand

 Mac, either you can't read or chose to ignore the truth.

 @Masahiro, personal experience? Ever been on a drlg rig or are you just regurgitating what you have heard....

Do not lose sight that the events on DWH WAS NOT AN ACCIDENT. It was due to intentional actions by BP. How many times does that need to be said?

Joe Wade, notice that the quote you use DOES NOT contain a recommendation to cut corners. It states the problems and grief that could be encountered IF, repeat IF, corner were cut and stupidity reigned. You have use this quote before trying to say something it doesn't say. Seem you can't make your point without misquoting and to do so knowingly is to lie.

October 8, 2010 at 7:45am 

His agenda is to create confusion; hoping the general public would be gullible enough to think his arguments had some basis. Sorry, Thad Daly, your questions and arguments showed you do not have even first year college science. I will have to make it really really simple for your underdeveloped brain because basically I get tired trashing “FB prostitutes” like you and your agenda to keep me engaged with such pseudo-intelligent arguments. Go play elsewhere.

So for this article I will spare some time to answer your totally off the mark assertions. If you are still not thoroughly embarrassed, please try some other therapy like dipping your head in “bovine output” for a change. The reason I am not engaging you on the facebook directly, is because the last two times I did, my computer “burned up”. You and your accomplices are playing a sneaky game of IP stalking. Sorry Thad Daly and gangs, I know your game and you are not going to trap me so easily. Try something else. For my regular readers, take this article as a 101 course in interpretation.

 Thad Daly says: About the ROV vids, the key word is " interpretation".
Welcome to my world. You just made my day. Interpretation is derived from the verb, interpret. According to Oxford Dictionary:
interpret
v. (interpreted, interpreting)
1 explain the meaning of (words, actions, etc.).  translate orally the words of a person speaking a different language.

2 perform (a creative work) in a way that conveys one’s understanding of the creator’s ideas.  understand as having a particular meaning or significance.

– DERIVATIVES interpretability n. interpretable adj. interpretation n. interpretational adj. interpretative adj. interpretatively adv. interpretive adj. interpretively adv.


ORIGIN ME: from OFr. interpreter or L. interpretari ‘explain, translate’, from interpres, interpret- ‘agent, translator, interpreter’.

Thus to interpret the ancient Egyptian artifacts and graphic writings, you need to understand and be well versed with not just any archaeological knowledge but those related to ancient Egypt. To interpret geological features you need to be trained as a geologist first. Then only can you interpret seismic sections, aerial photographs, satellite images, side scan sonar, MBES, well logs etc into geologically sound representation of the true or natural geology. Geohazards is a special field where in addition to natural geological features and processes, man-made processes and features are analysed as well. Exploration and geohazards may share fundamental geophysics, but their approach and objectives are different.

A damn good geologist does not necessary be good in geohazards analyses and prediction. You only have to read my past papers, site / blowout/incidences investigation reports and QC reports of the last 30 years to see the alarming number of ridiculous mis-interpretation made even by experienced leading geohazards experts working with the world's largest geohazards survey company. Put in simple terms, predicting geohazards accurately and reliably does not depend on the size of your wallet or the company. Very often, the naïve oil companies are impressed by the size of their airguns, length of their vessels, number of offices around the world etc when these meant little in determining the truth of the matter so that a reliable geohazards assessment and prediction can be made.

If so many well-trained, highly paid geologists can and had failed in geohazards interpretation and prediction, what makes you think a rigger with a bogus college degree and pretending to be an drilling/fluid/mechanical (choose one) engineer can succeed? So what takes you so long to realise that the key word is interpretation. Next you are gong to say it is a matter of interpretation. Yes, I have heard that countless times before, especially when the interpreter is wrong. The accuracy and reliability of your interpretation depends a lot on your technical background. A pseudo engineer is no geologist or geophysicist. So stop pretending you can assess and interpret geohazards risks or anything outside the well-bore. You are not cut out for it. Your imbecility knows no bounds and the following answers will show you why.

Thad Daly says: It does not matter if it aerial from 10,000' or ROV at 5,000' below msl.
Aerial photograph recon is totally different from rov photo interpretation in so many aspects. You must be a real retard to say that height or depth does not matter. It does. There is a tremendous difference in pressure, penetration of light, scale of things, density, flow of media, etc etc.

Only a fool would think interpretating an aerial photograph with a 1:10,000 scale taken from 10,000 ft is the same as looking at a limited camera viewport with 1:100 scale taken from tens of metres. If you think a hole on the ground from 10000ft in the air looks the same through an rov camera 5,000 ft below MSL, then your mind has already been screwed.


Thad Daly says: Have you had any training in photo interpretation?
Am I supposed to be impressed with your training credentials? Aerial photo interpretation is part of our geology curriculum. It is irrelevant to what we are discussing.

 Thad Daly says: As you can not reach through the ROV vids and collect bottom sample or cut a core your "specil knowledge" is only academic. What is being view and interpretated is physical objects and you can only see the outer surfaces of any objects or bottom structures.
Have you ever told a major oil company like Shell in an emergency boardroom meeting with all the heads of departments, that the piece of “natural rock” shown in the rov video near the BT-05 blowout platform, was not what it was, but a piece of the cemented seafloor blown off by the blowout. Have you ever proven 20 senior Shell managers (engineers, drillers, geo, etc) wrong? They had all agreed to shut down the Barton A platform following the blowout, after watching the frightening rov videos of collapsing seafloor, cracks and craters on the seafloor spewing columns of gas. They were all convinced by the rov video of an imminent collapse. I watched the same videos at the same time and came out with a totally different view. That my friend is the difference between a geohazards specialist and the exploration experts. That platform is still standing today after 20 years.

Have you ever been given “needle in a haystack” search missions and found them all; 1988 BP – lost well heads, 2004 Shell, buried well head 5 m, 2005 Shell lost and abandoned pipelines (24 from 8 charted ones), 2008 Otto Energy – lost piles and mooring chains, 2008 – undetected fibre optic cables etc. Many of them proven with recovery, lost records, rov video etc. Of course I do not expect you to understand the implications of all these.

I have saved many oil companies millions of dollars by sticking out my neck to prove many times, the conventional interpretation or accepted status quo were wrong. There were times where my geohazards assessments went against the wishes of the oil companies. They looked for subservient geohazards “pro-of-the-wrong-kind” for second opinions favourable to their exploration objectives. Guess what. They all ended having blowouts and needed me to set them straight. We need professionals who are able to stand straight and not bend to the whims and fancies of the oil exploration masters. We see that in Halliburton and BP. Yes, you can cry out and say we recommended this and that, but BP had the final say. Did we see any of the engineers resigned in disgust? No because BP got their way, safe or not safe does not matter. And we have people like you still prostituting for BP.

So did you just said my skills were “academic” and not proven? Do you see why the mafia in the oil industry wants to “kill me”? Because I was right and they were wrong and as long as I live, they live in fear that their misdeeds, cheating, frauds, mis-interpretation and negligence will be exposed. They sent you, Thad Daly to keep me engaged with your silly questions.


Thad Daly says: You claim cracks in the bottom, could this be drag marks from moving debris, equipment or other item around when working on th well head.
Are you suggesting I made the interpretations using my behind? Drag marks have different fundamental characteristics than cracks. As an engineer you should know that. Oh I forgot you were only a pseudo engineer. I would not bother writing an article on insignificant drag marks would I? Fissures that had developed on the seafloor due to the blowout, that I would write. Just to be sure, are you reading the right articles written by me? Could you quote the exact “you claim cracks in the bottom” paragraph or the link. Given your poor comprehension, one cannot be too sure.

For your information, I spent more than 20 years working 16 hours a day charting and had clocked more than 20,000 line km of seabed survey. I can differentiate between a drag mark and a “fissure” based on fundamental criteria that I taught my trainee geos. No, I am not going to tutor you for free. Would I risk 30 years of my expertise on something I am not sure?


Thad Daly says: You claim methane vents yet when BP tried to cap the well first time the cap filled with methane hydrates, why are these methane vent not turning into methane hydrate?

I would not bothered to answer this. You read my articles and then look basic chemistry literature on methane gas-hydrate conversion.

Thad Daly says: The collasped - there is basically three ways to collapse casing. Bend causing it to kink at bend. External pressure greater than the collaspe stength of the casing AND the internal hydrostatic pressure in the casing this would only happen if the casing was ran in empty, hard to do as at some point the empty casing would "float" in the drlg fluid. Mechanical collaspe due to an external mechanical pressure such as a formation shift, not possible as the upper sedimentary formation do not have compressive strengths greater than the collaspe strength of the casing especially with the internal hydrostatic pressure increasing the collaspe resistance.

Already explained in my articles. Look for GWSF (gas-saturated weak sub-formation) zone hazards and EGCP zone.

Thad Daly says: Casing can and does collapse and the indentation are symetrical elongated oval in shape not the irregular markings shown in the vid.

There is no point arguing with you over this. BP retrieved this casing on 19 July 2010 from the 3rd well which was blown on 20 April 2010. Go and ask BP to show you the recovered casing. They were caught with their pants down. If your eyes are blinded by their greenbacks pasted over your eyes, what is the point of this academic theoretic discussion on how smooth and oval the asshole is going to be. Write a letter to your congressman to demand BP hand over the indented casing. Then you have your proof. Why bark at me? I did not retrieved the broken casing. Why was the video hidden? Because the insiders wanted the public to know what BP did was criminal. They smuggled it out despite the tight security. Why do you still prostitute yourself at the expense of the gulf victims? Do some good for a change.