Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

It Is What It Is

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • It Is What It Is

    the classic answer by everyman to the unknowable and unexpected.....

    Rate of Oil Leak, Still Not Clear, Puts Doubt on BP

    By JUSTIN GILLIS and HENRY FOUNTAIN

    Staring day after day at images of oil billowing from an undersea well in the Gulf of Mexico, many Americans are struggling to make sense of the numbers.

    On Monday, BP said a cap was capturing 11,000 barrels of oil a day from the well. The official government estimate of the flow rate is 12,000 to 19,000 barrels a day, which means the new device should be capturing the bulk of the oil.

    But is it? With no consensus among experts on how much oil is pouring from the wellhead, it is difficult — if not impossible — to assess the containment cap’s effectiveness. BP has stopped trying to calculate a flow rate on its own, referring all questions on that subject to the government. The company’s liability will ultimately be determined in part by how many barrels of oil are spilled.

    The immense undersea gusher of oil and gas, seen on live video feed, looks as big as it did last week, or bigger, before the company sliced through the pipe known as a riser to install its new collection device.

    At least one expert, Ira Leifer, who is part of a government team charged with estimating the flow rate, is convinced that the operation has made the leak worse, perhaps far worse than the 20 percent increase that government officials warned might occur when the riser was cut.

    Dr. Leifer (you can't make that up) said in an interview on Monday that judging from the video, cutting the pipe might have led to a several-fold increase in the flow rate from the well.

    “The well pipe clearly is fluxing way more than it did before,” said Dr. Leifer, a researcher at the University of California, Santa Barbara. “By way more, I don’t mean 20 percent, I mean multiple factors.”

    Asked about the flow rate at a news conference at the White House on Monday, Adm. Thad W. Allen, the Coast Guard commander in charge of the federal response to the spill, said that as BP captured more of the oil, the government should be able to offer better estimates of the flow from the wellhead by tracking how much reaches the surface.

    “That is the big unknown that we’re trying to hone in and get the exact numbers on,” Admiral Allen said. “And we’ll make those numbers known as we get them. We’re not trying to low-ball it or high-ball it. It is what it is.”

    Speaking at a briefing in Houston on Monday, Kent Wells, a BP executive involved in the containment effort, declined to estimate the total flow and how much it might have increased. He said that video images from the wellhead showed a “curtain of oil” leaking from under the cap.

    “How much that is, we’d all love to know,” Mr. Wells said. “It’s really difficult to tell.”

    He said that more than 27,000 barrels of oil had been collected, and that engineers were working to optimize the collection rate.

    On Sunday, engineers halted their efforts to close all four vents on the capping device, because even with one vent closed, the amount of oil being captured was approaching 15,000 barrels a day, the processing capacity of the collection ship at the surface.

    Mr. Wells reiterated that a second collection system, involving hoses at the wellhead, would be implemented “by the middle of June.” That oil would be collected by another rig with the ability to handle at least 5,000 barrels a day, he said.

    The success of the containment device has cast new doubts on the official estimates of the flow rate, developed by a government-appointed team called the Flow Rate Technical Group. Before the riser pipe was cut, the group made estimates by several methods, including an analysis of video footage, and the overlap of those estimates produced the range of 12,000 to 19,000 barrels a day that the team reported on May 27. That was two to four times as high as the government’s previous estimate of 5,000 barrels a day, a number that had been widely ridiculed by scientists and advocacy groups.

    Yet the scientists who produced that new range emphasized its uncertainty when they presented it. In fact, a subgroup that analyzed the plume emerging at the wellhead could offer no upper bound for its flow estimate, and could come up with only a rough idea of the lower bound, which it pegged at 12,000 to 25,000 barrels a day.

    The Flow Rate Technical Group is scheduled to release a new estimate this week or early next, though it is not clear whether that report will take into account the changed circumstances of recent days.

    Some scientists involved in the Flow Rate Technical Group say that they would like to produce a better estimate, but that they are frustrated by what they view as stonewalling on BP’s part, including tardiness in producing high-resolution video that could be subjected to computer analysis, as well as the company’s reluctance to permit a direct measurement of the flow rate. They said the installation of the new device and the rising flow of oil to the surface had only reinforced their conviction that they did not have enough information.

    “It’s apparent that BP is playing games with us, presumably under the advice of their legal team,” Dr. Leifer said. “It’s six weeks that it’s been dumping into the gulf, and still no measurements.”

    President Obama has repeatedly criticized BP’s handling of response efforts. He has been criticized for his seeming lack of outrage over the spill, but he took an angrier tone Monday in an interview to be broadcast Tuesday morning on NBC’s “Today” show.

    “I don’t sit around just talking to experts because this is a college seminar,” Mr. Obama told the show’s host, Matt Lauer, in an interview in Kalamazoo, Mich. “We talk to these folks because they potentially have the best answer so I know whose ass to kick.”

    On Monday, Mr. Wells, the BP executive, said that engineers had always felt that the oil traveling through the damaged riser created some back pressure that reduced the flow rate. “We always expected to see some increase in flow” when the riser was cut, he said. “It’s difficult to do any calculations on that.”

    The company, which for several weeks had publicly rejected the idea of using subsea equipment to measure the flow rate, now says it is up to the flow-rate group itself to decide whether to undertake such a step.

    “We are fully cooperating with the Flow Rate Technical Group,” said Anne Kolton, a spokeswoman for BP. “We are working very closely with their experts.”

    The difficulty adds one more item to the government’s long to-do list as it begins planning its response to future oil spills: creating some kind of technology that can produce accurate numbers in a deep-sea blowout.

    The lack of a reliable measurement system “opens the door to all this speculation and uncertainty,” said Elgie Holstein, oil spill coordinator for the Environmental Defense Fund, an advocacy group, “and we’re all reduced to staring at grainy video footage from the ocean floor.”

    The success of the cap has prompted commentators on cable networks and the Internet to ask what BP intends to do with the oil, whether the company should be allowed to profit from it or even whether the federal government should confiscate it.

    BP officials have said previously that they intend to refine the oil and sell it, although the oil may require special handling. They have also pointed out that any money to be made — at current prices the oil collected by the cap so far would be worth about $1.9 million — would pale in comparison with the costs of the spill, currently $1 billion and counting.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/08/us...ef=todayspaper




    Surprisingly we haven't been told that an oil slick is a beautiful thing...or did I miss that on FOX?

  • #2
    Re: It Is What It Is

    Well , that equals 1/10 of 1 percent of a normal days consumption here in the good ol U.S. of A. Anyone thinking our use of the other 99.9% is clean can sleep well.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: It Is What It Is

      “We are fully cooperating with the Flow Rate Technical Group,”
      .... Until they come up with a figure and try to hold us liable for it.
      This is the corporate equivalent of taking the 5th during a criminal investigation and sounds to me like a sound strategy. No surprise that BP is making no effort to try and figure out how much oil is going into the water. I'd think that they'd be smart enough to figure that out on their own but apparently it takes a whole team of lawyers to tell them to keep their mouths shut.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: It Is What It Is

        Originally posted by dropthatcash View Post
        Well , that equals 1/10 of 1 percent of a normal days consumption here in the good ol U.S. of A. Anyone thinking our use of the other 99.9% is clean can sleep well.
        That reminds me of the Journal's happy talk that over 75% of Americans are working as much as they'd like, so what's the problem?

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: It Is What It Is

          Originally posted by roxtar View Post
          .... Until they come up with a figure and try to hold us liable for it.
          This is the corporate equivalent of taking the 5th during a criminal investigation and sounds to me like a sound strategy. No surprise that BP is making no effort to try and figure out how much oil is going into the water. I'd think that they'd be smart enough to figure that out on their own but apparently it takes a whole team of lawyers to tell them to keep their mouths shut.
          It's actually much simpler than that.

          In three paragraphs or less I would like any iTuliper to describe exactly how the precise measure of flowrate that everyone seems to desire and demand is supposed to be achieved on an underwater blowout wellhead with no secure connection to it.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: It Is What It Is

            Originally posted by GRG55 View Post
            It's actually much simpler than that.

            In three paragraphs or less I would like any iTuliper to describe exactly how the precise measure of flowrate that everyone seems to desire and demand is supposed to be achieved on an underwater blowout wellhead with no secure connection to it.

            Considering your the expert here, Is it possible for the flow rates to differ over time or different day? for example on one day 50000 barrels spill, on another 37000 spill? What factors could cause different rates? plate movement? From the video do you believe this is a high pressure well or a low pressure well? Also if a relief well is drilled will it relieve enough pressure/oil to minimize the effects of the original well? What is the REAL purpose or intention of the relief well?

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: It Is What It Is

              Originally posted by GRG55 View Post
              In three paragraphs or less I would like any iTuliper to describe exactly how the precise measure of flowrate that everyone seems to desire and demand is supposed to be achieved on an underwater blowout wellhead with no secure connection to it.
              Not three paragraphs, but 5 minutes of googling turned up two different methods. Both appear to have been used on "Black Smokers" on the Ocean floor to estimate flow rate. The older technique involves "slicing" the plumes into 2d images at different heights with high-frequency SONAR. The other involves recording the acoustic radiation and correlating with known flow rates. I am no expert, but both seem promising, and I read a story about BP refusing to allow Oceanographers who have been using these techniques for years from using them on the gusher.

              Method #1:
              http://depts.washington.edu/aploa/ARSHF/index.html
              Doppler Measurements of Black Smoker Flow Velocity:



              Photo of SM2000 sonar and rotator (elevation) mechanism mounted on JASON

              As part of the VIP2000 (Vent Imaging, Pacific) measurement effort on the Endeavour segment of the Juan de Fuca Ridge, the feasibility of using a multibeam sonar (Kongsberg-Simrad-Mesotech SM2000) to determine vent flow velocities was investigated. The sonar, operating at 200 kHz, was mounted on JASON, which maintained a stable position on the seafloor. The sonar was pointed to provide image slices of several different black smoker plumes. In order to permit coherent Doppler processing, the sonar was set to transmit two-ping bursts, and the phase difference of the resulting echo pair was used to determine the component of velocity along the sonar line of sight ("radial" velocity). This work was done in collaboration with Peter Rona at Rutgers University.



              Sonar Geometry:

              Electronic beamforming provides a "slice" through the plume at each elevation step. Each slice consists of 128 beams, 1.5° wide, spanning a 120° sector. To produce a 3-D image of the plume, the 2-D slices are mechanically scanned with 1° steps in elevation.




              Coherent Doppler Processing Algorithm:
              The backscattered signals from two consecutive pings are divided into range bins along the axis of each beam. The velocity within each range bin is found by estimating the phase of the cross correlation between the pings. To avoid aliasing (when f>2π), phase unwrapping is performed. First, the region of scattering from the plume is isolated for processing (the area outlined in white). The peak amplitude within this area is then located, and the phase is unwrapped along the axis of the beam containing the peak (in the direction of the arrows along axis 1). Phase is then unwrapped across the beams for each range bin (in the direction of axis 2, moving away from axis 1 in azimuth). Multiples of 2π are added to the phase so that it approaches zero at the edges of the processing area. The radial velocity within each range bin is then computed as:
              v = vmax p / π,

              where:

              vmax = c/(4ft) =1.85 cm/s

              is the aliasing velocity

              with:

              c = sound speed,
              t = time between pings = 0.1 s
              p = phase
              f = acoustic frequency = 200 kHz



              Fluid Velocity of Hydrothermal Plume:





              3-D Reconstruction of Fluid Velocity of Hydrothermal Plume:


              Slices of plume velocity are combined to reconstruct a 3-D grid of "radial" velocity. The 3-D image consists of slices recorded over a period of 4 minutes. Isosurfaces of velocity are illustrated for a plume at Grotto, Main Endeavour Field, in July 2000.
              And method #2:

              http://www.plosone.org/article/info:...l.pone.0000133

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: It Is What It Is

                One thing to consider when looking at the plume.Before, the leak was going into the sea with only the back pressure of the water depth pushing against it. Now with the containment line on top it is putting back presssure on the leak. Kind of like holding your hand over a garden hose. So the leak could be less but look bigger because it's bucking the pressure of the connection.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: It Is What It Is

                  Originally posted by GRG55 View Post
                  It's actually much simpler than that.

                  In three paragraphs or less I would like any iTuliper to describe exactly how the precise measure of flowrate that everyone seems to desire and demand is supposed to be achieved on an underwater blowout wellhead with no secure connection to it.
                  1. Get a ROV to place a sonic flow meter at the base of the riser
                  2. velocity x area = volume thru the pipe
                  3. Subtract barrels collected from this number
                  4. The leak rate is teh diff between these #'s

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X