If BP Can't Stop The Oil Flow, Maybe The Netroots Can Corral It
Image updated 2:15 PDT 6/10/2010
After 52 days of frustrating helplessness, it's nice to see people reach out, pool creative and technical resources, and find a solution that might actually work to plug the damn hole.
Shoq* initiated an effort to brainstorm ideas around ways to redirect the oil rather than stop the flow on June 6th. He was soon joined by Justin Grindal, an engineer who was present during the "top kill" effort last month. They worked together and with others to develop an idea to enclose the well with a wide duct anchored to the sea floor which would corral the oil within and force it up to the surface to be caught by waiting tankers.
It's really as simple as the drawing at the top depicts. Yes, there are specific materials that would have to be obtained, and there is some expertise needed to set the anchors, but it appears to be an elegant solution.
It is the same principle as a chimney. Smoke rises and is directed up and away from your house rather than billowing into your house because of the upward draft created when the flue is opened. Similarly, the idea here is to enclose the oil gush and give it a vented pathway upward and out. Because oil is lighter than water, and because of the force with which it's being spewed out of the well, it will rise on its own.
There are details I've left out of my description for the sake of clarity, but Shoq hasn't. Listen to Nicole Sandler's show yesterday for more on how it works, or read his post (there's a technical design drawing there too).
It has been submitted to BP engineers for review, but there are thousands of ideas in front of them for review, and only a few reviewers. If you know anyone who can get the right set of eyes on this idea, please forward this post to them, or point them toward Shoq's blog.
My first reaction was skepticism and frankly, a little patronizing pat on Shoq's back. This is partly because it was so simple, and partly because of concern that even if it is viable, getting it done would be such a process-laden paperwork-ridden affair that relief wells would be drilled first.
After all, if it's so easy, why isn't it already being done? But every objection I've raised has been answered, and engineers have agreed that it seems like it would work. What we have here is a group of designers, engineers and concerned citizens pooling their creativity and energy into something that might actually succeed. That beats the heck out of feeling helpless.
As Micah Sifry tweeted earlier today:
You betcha.
*Shoq is an industrial designer and software architect who chooses to remain anonymous for privacy reasons.
What about these sea floor fractures that are rumored to be oozing oil and supposedly will get worse? Little help on this info?
Generally speaking I don't trust anyone making over 150K a year.
Currently there is no evidence of the well "going breach". This is the worst case scenario of a blowout, but is very rare and is generally caused by shallow pockets of gas (which is not the case in this well). Even if the shallow casing has ruptured (which it very well may have), the well is still both killable and containable. Hope that helps.
.
No gas control.
Fifty million cubic feet of natural gas or more, and no plan to deal with it.
UNCONTROLLED natural gas sank the Deepwater Horizon, remember?
This is exactly the kind of thing I've been wondering about myself. Why mess with big domes when you could put a big flexible chimney over the well head and direct it up in a controlled way rather then letting it run wild.
and what do you think this overabundance of oil in storage would do to the price of oil and do you think the oil companies would like that?
Methinks you're somewhat overestimating the amount that's coming out here.
The US uses 20 million barrels of crude a day, and that's just the US. Even if that leak were 100,000 barrels a day it wouldn't have a measurable effect on oil prices.
-fred
There may not be the capacity to process it all at once, or store that much, so where does the crude sit in the meantime, on tankers (very expensive storage facilities)? Perhaps they don't want too much unprocessed crude on their hands at one time. Normally they can adjust the spigot to control flow,l but now it's gushing out beyond control. Isn't present supply and demand a huge factor in crude oil and gasoline prices? (disclaimer: I don't really know anything about this stuff.)
"If the US government enforced its banking laws like it did its park regulations, we wouldn't be
in this damn park in the first place." OCCUPY.!!
I haven't a clue what will or will not work but I am hoping something - anything will work.
I hope in the future there is an understanding that the difference between experimental and exploratory drilling is like night and day.
"I know that there are people who do not love their fellow
man, and I hate people like that! " ~ Tom Lehrer (1928 - )
I believe that's their standard response.
I suppose it does but they don't own all the water and shoreline they are polluting so they are liable for damages to others, just as we would be. That's how things go in America. Try drilling a well in your yard and have it gush into your neighbours' yards and see what happens.
"If the US government enforced its banking laws like it did its park regulations, we wouldn't be
in this damn park in the first place." OCCUPY.!!
that this is the first that this idea has been considered?
I figured it was dismissed or something. I'm an idiot and the first thing I thought of was using something akin to a chimney to capture and divert the oil.
I'm a server engineer, so what the fuck do I know about oil?
Simple, elegant design. This should get the highest sort of consideration. Are there any engineers out there that can evaluate its feasibility?
Flexible joints. I don't see any. That ship on top isn't stationary. There is sideways stress on the riser and sheath they propose too. Normal risers have flexible joints. This sheath needs to bend in the same places as the riser it is covering or things may break each other when that mile long column sways. Hopefully with an engineer that knows the riser configuration they are using they have planned for that.
Well pressure. This being a fairly high pressure well will the corral material hold up at the initial pressure.
Both are things any glorified plumber (retired Chem.E.) should notice. The bigger pdf I can't get to load from the site. So maybe they have both covered and I just can't see that detail. /shrug
I don't know enough about drilling anchors to comment on that part.
Not knowing enough is often the chief qualification for commenting here.
TFR
... Secretary of Defense.
"As we know, there are known knowns. There are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns. That is to say, we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns, the ones we don't know we don't know."
- Donald 'Ricky' Rumsfeld, Feb 12, 2002.
Donny Ricky ever said. And dim sum.
TFR
"To let understanding stop at what cannot be understood is a great achievement. Those that cannot do this will be destroyed upon the Lathe of Heaven."
- Lao Tze
plantagenist. Or is is a plantagenator? Anyway he is 110% original and gives it all he has got and more some.
TFR
or he didn't mention them since he didn't know about them.
The covering is not rigid. It's flexible, like a membrane.
with 2 layers of wire mesh ( nick named monkey trap ) and an armored casing is much stronger , this type of pipe is used for hi pressure and to allow for vibration hence its flexabilty .
every time you throw a little mud , you lose a little ground .
Yes, the ship is effectively stationary. The tube is perforated,allowing equalization. Flexible joints are only required in a rigid pipe, not flexible guide lines and plastic. Certified Drilling engineers have carefully vetted this concept. The only real issues are the hydrates, and the time to fabricate. The basis physics are rudimentary.
I'd think, until the flow vents through enough perforations to equalize. That's the area to wonder about.
Sure it's like a chimney and oil wants to rise, but smoke isn't shooting off my fire at whatever psi that stuff is ...
I keep hearing that engineers have vetted this, but never a comment about the HUGE quantities of methane emitted with the oil. The documents from BP mention millions of SCF of methane per day, at a GOR (Gas Oil Ratio of 3000 to 1) 3,000 x 50,000 barrels of oil at 5 cu ft per barrel equals 75,000,000 SCF of gas hovering over a lake of oil. You want to work there?
Consider a ten mile an hour breeze at the surface, just enough to move a long blob of gas over to one of the ships, where it can be sucked into one of the many diesels holding position with thrusters. (This is what blew up the Deepwater Horizon).
# Major hazard : Fire and High Pressure
# Toxicity (Am. Conf. Of Gov. Ind. Hygienists ACGIH 2000 Edition) : Simple Asphyxiant
# Flammability limits in air (STP conditions) : 5.0-15.0 vol%
# No odor
I've actually observed an explosion at a gasoline station in Yosemite, where the ignition point was forty feet from the car filling up. Nasty nasty fire.
You keep mentioning pumps somewhere. Where are they? Do you realize that there will be slug flow, and that the gas will RUSH the oil along in house sized blobs due to harmonic effects between the tube size and the expansion of the gas? What is your projected figure for the average density of the oil/gas column a mile deep and six feet in diameter?
How do you propose to handle this erratic flow of oil and gas while not incinerating the crews of the ships pumping the oil and stabilizing the tube?
..like the riser is a flexible oil impermeable sock. the volume of the riser (chimney) is large enough such that the pressure from the oil flow does not translate to high pressure if the oil is offloaded at the top.
I had this sort of idea right after their top had thing froze up. they are trying to channel all the oil into a small pipe which is subject to blockage. They are unlikely to block a 30 foot diameter flexible conduit.
Also, the base could be expanded to cover seeps from the rock surrounding the borehole.
is if the top of the shroud is above the waterline, and the oil fills it, otherwise the pressure of the water around the well shroud equalizes the pressure from inside the well shroud. Unless you get a very sudden explosion.
"It's really as simple as the drawing at the top depicts." - Like Junior High School simple, unsafe, and feasible but useless and lame.
You're doin a hell of a job, Brownie. Er, I mean Shoq.
- An engineers evaluation. No charge.
...you might want to put a sock in it.
asshole? You shoot off your mouth, but don't have any facts to back it up. I think you're a knucklehead, "Neil".
since you didn't actually "evaluate" anything, you just shot your mouth off. Why don't you buy a pistol, and actually shoot your mouth off?
I'd be having secret talks with Russia about how they handled their leaks. --"I've given them more than enough time, I'm ready to throw all of them in jail and seize all their assets, let's nuke this stupid hole shut and if it destroys all their equipment in the process, tough shit."
that's what bothers me. forget about equipment destruction. radioactive oceans aren't good for anyone.
with any evidence that the Russians really blew up five (was that the number) nukes on runaway oil and gas wells. But that is a minor point that would only worry the pointy headed.
TFR
I just want something done right now, something that doesn't make collecting the oil the first priority. The flexible hose idea, sure it could redirect the spill,but what are they going to do- park a few thousand tankers offshore and just keep them rotating to collect up all the oil till it finally runs out? I'm just talking out of frustration here.
I'm sick of Obama's approach. With the section of the post-Exxon law that allows the Feds to take over a company in an extreme situation, I would have done that two weeks after the leak started. That would allow the Feds to move BP equipment where's it's needed, and if they still needed more equipment I would tell the other Oil Companies that if they want to keep drilling in our waters, then their going to help out too.
If he got tough with BP then they might not cooperate at all. That's kinda been his thought process throughout his presidency.
... throw 'em all in jail and start seizing assets.
Talk of nuking (or otherwise using explosives) to seal the breach is comic-book physics.
I would prefer STOP over CONTAIN, but when it comes to the latter, there's containment to minimize further damage to the ecosystem, and there's containment to recover oil so we don't lose money. And BP is all about the latter.
Specific material will be needed for this duct. Like duct tape.
Plenty left over at Homeland Security and they are supposed to be in charge. Damn that BP Obama for being so blind.
TFR
Is there anything it can't do?
/snark
//but has temporarily fixed a lot of things with those
with a roll of duct tape.
TFR
it's a cure-all.
My tool kit; exact. I also have a hammer and use elastics, wire hangers and twist ties.
"If the US government enforced its banking laws like it did its park regulations, we wouldn't be
in this damn park in the first place." OCCUPY.!!
Sorry, really.
Not plausible.
In a perfect world of course, the US Government, who trains the greatest military on the planet, which nobody can deny, would be fully prepared for every contingency, and things like this would be all clean, lickety-split, no questions asked, BP pushed aside at the first moment of fuckup, all clean, hands washed, back in DC waiting for next disaster, in no time at all.
But people don't like to pay their taxes and they bitch about paying their taxes every day.
Human beings are not ready to live in civilization.
Even electric eels live more civilized existences than this endless spawn of human beings whining and puling and ruining and genociding.
I'm a lot like Ricky Gervais and the Golden Globes: Why?
does not want to capture all of the oil because if the Government can measure it, the clean up fines go up.
At this point, they know they're hosed and being hosed more with every day that passes. Because they stupidly chose to self-insure losses, insurers everywhere are breathing easier and their $6.8 billion in the bank is looking a little less secure.
trying to limit their liability any way they can. If trying to disperse instead of capture saves their butts in the least, they'll do it
Why not just let nature take its course and end all life on Earth as we know it.
when you get right down to it? In the universal order of things
higher ordered beings will probably drop by this rock in some future millenium and wonder why it is so sticky. And then move on to more significant celestial bodies.
TFR
It's why they don't visit now, not for long anyway. It's more like hovering and observing our orb (and going ..."ummm, no, thanks!"). Once we rid ourselves of all the predatory (human) vermin they might feel safe here and finally show their faces.
"If the US government enforced its banking laws like it did its park regulations, we wouldn't be
in this damn park in the first place." OCCUPY.!!
Somebody should email them this.
I'm a lot like Ricky Gervais and the Golden Globes: Why?
So I guess that's why we're not hearing about FEMA fixing it.
http://www.fema.gov/news/disasters.fema?year=...
I'm a lot like Ricky Gervais and the Golden Globes: Why?
KISS school of thought .
Just like a hood over your stove I have several Q's
1. how would you anchor the ring
2. how do attach the steel cage to the ring
3. why PVC , temperature and pressure are not PVC best friends
4. can the flow ever be shut off , or is this a stop gap untill a relieve well can be drilled
5. what happens durning a hurrciane
Any oil that is captured should belong to the US before BP can gut the company of its assets .That should happen now , oh Mr Grayson are you lurking around here ? .
every time you throw a little mud , you lose a little ground .
and American ingenuity has it covered.
http://www.theoildrum.com/files/8A%20Hurrican...
1. With really heavy stuff
2. Metal coat hangers.
3. More metal coat hangers.
4. Of course the flow can never be shut off. The oil companies only worry about getting to the oil and removing it. Why would they ever shut it off? That would be like leaving money in the stupid ground. sheesh
5. Lots of wind and rain.(Is this a trick question?)
metal coat hangers must be kept in reserve as necessary medical devices. Chewing gum and metal paper clips are avaialable.
TFR
what happens durning a hurrciane , do the tankers stay on site , or run for cover , what then oil keeps gushing to the surface ? , no trick Question .
every time you throw a little mud , you lose a little ground .
Hurricane Dennis forced the evacuation of a total of 445 rigs and platforms.
After . .
http://www.theoildrum.com/files/2A%20Thunder%...
5. Oh. Well then in that case they can tie the ship down with metal coat hangers.
through the storm back to Gloucester.
TFR
. . so that's where the icing problem comes in!
metal coat hangers , mine are wood and pvc . I have used metal coat hangers for small gas welding jobs ( auto body ) .
every time you throw a little mud , you lose a little ground .
Mommy Dearest won't allow metal coat hangers. EVER!
1) The anchoring is a non issue. It uses injected sea anchors, which are standard tools for anchoring drilling guidelines (which form the duct's armature).
2) The cables pass through the mid-rings to the bottom ring, which is anchored as per #1
3) The HDPE material is fully operational at temperatures from -40 to 245 F. The oil gushign from well cools very fast as it hits the water, so we are well within the material's tolerances.
4)The flow would continue in the duct until the relief wells finally stop it. It is our hope that devices like this could be manufactured and kept at the well sites, to prevent such disasters in the future.
5) In the event of a hurricane, the top of the tube is detached, and standard diesel float bags are attached. Calibrated to float at preset depths, these stock devices will keep the the tube floating quietly at 100 meters down until the storm passes. Naturally, some oil will escape in that 2-24 hour period.
*
every time you throw a little mud , you lose a little ground .
No coat hangers?
.
.
Ok enough of this nonsense. I think Shoq's idea has potential. And thank you for using your head to try to fix this nightmare.
i like that one
http://www.pannexresearch.com/katrina/LAOil.gif
how about a " flex metal " pipe with a wire mesh casing ?
every time you throw a little mud , you lose a little ground .
It should perform as designed. Customized solutions such as specially designed pipes could take months fabricate. The material vendor can produce the duct in one day.
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0406/fe...
I don't know diddly about engineering ( I do know that heat rises... whatever that means) but it looks like it will work to me. If you think it will help call the god damn White House and tell them. Give them this web address:
shoqvalue.com/corral
Press office = 202 456 2100
General White House switchboard = 202 456 1414
Tell them I sent you. lol
It would get someone's attention. We're trying everything we can think of.
Because I don't think "The Netroots" will be able to fix that.
I'm a lot like Ricky Gervais and the Golden Globes: Why?
After all, that is where it will go according to the name of the syndrome.
TFR
Well, let's start then by altering the graphic to show things at the correct scale. The spill is happening a mile down.
That might help illustrate the true amount of equipment and resources necessary to implementing the plan.
"Because oil is lighter than water, and because of the force with which it's being spewed out of the well, it will rise on its own."
Well, if that's completely true, then I guess BP is right when it claims that there are no underwater plumes of oil. Everything just shoots straight to the surface.
BP has been injecting millions of gallons of anti-freeze into the oil (dispersant) as it has been coming out of the blow out.
Had they not then, yes, more of the oil would be on the surface.
We needed another FDR, instead we got another clinton.
A scale drawing would not contribute much to the discussion, and only make it harder to grasp the concept (the tube would appear like a needed). The drawing is merely meant to illustrate the concepts. Most people can imagine a tube a whole lot longer that what is shown. Since the tube is permeable (perforated at regular intervals with small holes that let gas and pressure escape, but not the much denser oil), the pressure inside the tube is equal to the pressure outside, regardless of depth below the surface.
At the very least, it will give the audience a deeper appreciation for the challenges inherent in the situation. So, I offer the following link, which gives a lot of other fun information about up & down and where we are on the planet:
http://www.geekologie.com/2010/06/we_live_her...
As a chemist (retired) but not a chem engineer I can see many potential problems. What's coming up is a mix of different hydrocarbons with varying densities, including gas (at atmospheric pressure that is) and also sea water from a mile down.
Bottom line is: A ruptured deep sea oil well is a hell of a place to begin laboratory experiments to find a method for capturing the oil at it's source or to control the spread of diffuse oil. If space travel was possible, can you imagine building spaceports and transporting people without first redundantly validating the safety of the new system?
And the gas rises. The gas is not harmful to the ocean. The oil is. If it did not rise, we would not have all that oil on the beaches right now.
So, the gasses are not harmful to the ocean? You sure about that? And the perforations in the material will pass the gas (pardon) but not the oil? I was under the impression that the oil/gas column contained sand and other abrasives that affected the steel of the BOP and riser. What will it do to your sheathe?
..through a 30-40 foot wide tube should be quite slow. Sand and other abrasives should fall out quickly or be under such low pressure that it doesn't affect the tube.
The tube would also contain the dissolved gasses to some extent, though this might make things interesting on the surface....
That is something that does merit consideration, though: This containment vessel also contains the suspended particles of sand. When these settle out, they will settle out inside the skirting, which may become a considerable accumulation after a while.
Doesn't passing gases through water make all kinds of new solutions, like acids (or other)? All those molecules mix and make new things, like we get acid rain from water mixing with air pollution (gases).
"If the US government enforced its banking laws like it did its park regulations, we wouldn't be
in this damn park in the first place." OCCUPY.!!
A caller posed a good question.
He asked, with all these chemicals evaporating into the atmosphere(benzene) would we be likely to see a very toxic acid type rain? And what would it do to the ag business? Crop devastation.
It's just a matter of time before it starts raining benzene type acid rain.
What is your conceptual, continuity?
We're asking for a real planet-wide, total, chemical stew (land, air and water) if we don't wean ourselves from oil and coal (and probably plastics and such.)
Easy oil is past it's peak and it will continue to get more dangerous and risky as resereves are more difficult to reach. This will happen again somewhere else. Maybe not the same, but another oil/sea disaster. It must; simple odds.
The oil industry has (probably) trillions $$ invested in infrastructure worldwide (tankers, storage tanks, wells, pipelines, refineries) and they aren't planning on standing back from continued exploration, disasters or not. The people will inherit those. (Watch and see.)
That's why there are guys like Dick Cheney and the Bushes around. Hired hands.
"If the US government enforced its banking laws like it did its park regulations, we wouldn't be
in this damn park in the first place." OCCUPY.!!
They've been using dispersants down at the base of their well bore, the oil is being disolved into it's component chemistries, some of them are less bouyant than water, goof.
Maybe not all that helpful to name-call when an entire region is in danger of dying.
One possibility if this worked would be to turn off the dispersant, eh?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/10/mary...
Fully emulsified oil that has been floating in water for weeks (and loaded with dispersants injected into the gusher above the well bore) will partially sink, creating the subsea plumes you speak of. Remove the dispersant injectors now in use, and the source oil rises quite effectively on its own, which is why millions of gallons are now floating on the surface of the Gulf of Mexico.
And even if the Duct captured say, a mere 85% of the escaping oil, that's still a huge step up from where we are now. The current capture rate is thought to be bogus. They are actually pumping more oil from the well bore in order to capture it with the LMRP/TopCap.
We will probably soon learn that the net capture is probably not a whole lot better than letting the gusher run free. If we don't try something like this corraling concept soon, it will be academic: The Gulf state industries and shorelines will just die.
@shoq: you keep talking about BP pumping from the well. #1, there's no pump in the well bore. The oil AND GAS come out from reservoir (formation) pressure at around 10,000 psi. Restrictions in the LMRP and BOP drop that a bit to 8500 psi, and it then bucks the 2500 psi from being a mile down. When it gets in the cap the density difference (gas coming out of solution in the oil, oil density lower than water) means the mix is essentially acting like a percolator coffee pot. The valves in the cap prevent excess pressure blowing the cap off.
The engineering challennge is to throttle (Not PUMP) the oil and gas coming out of the top of the riser tube so they can process it as fast as possible currently over 15,000 barrels of oil and millions of cubic feet of gas.
You don't seem to appreciate the dangers inherent in handling these pressure variations, and explosive nature of all that gas, which your scheme has no control over.
If the gas leaks out all these little holes in your tube, where does it end up on the surface? Do you realize it's NATURAL GAS!!??
I have no clue about the science here. I mean, it sounds cool, but I just don't know, so I won't say anything one way or another on that.
What I will say: If such an idea works, BP must be taken out of the equation. President Obama should declare some sort of emergency whereby BP is forced to sell the whole shebang they've got down there to the people willing to fix it. (Presidents these days are declaring emergency powers to do just about everything else, so we might as well do one such power grab right.)
Everyone is equally entitled to the pursuit of happiness. Wasn't that once self evident?
Sell? Sell? That made me laugh out loud. I say just take the god damn thing. At this point we own it. It is ours. BP has shown they are not capable to handle the responsibility that goes with oil drilling. Sell? Bullshit! Take it. It is ours. Nationalize BP as long as they are in the neighborhood.
How much of the "expertise" at the site is BP's? If their work consists of mainly coordinating subcontractors and we know that they are just not applying the resources to stop this then the idea of replacing them at some point has to be considered. They are not doing all they can.
That Obama has people right now working on a scenario to push BP out and take over. If not then he is really hopeless. I can't believe that there isn't an oil service company that cannot do a better job than BP.
At this point BP doesn't seem to have the mindset, the competency, the urgency or any of what it takes to evaluate different technologies and decide on a path forward. They just don't. Their trying to fix things with dispersants, PR spin, denial, disinformation, and denying information. They are still trying to reduce future liability with the same old corporate bag of tricks while they are plummeting toward earth end over end.
I would like to get the chance to pack the golden parachutes for their upper management people.
Maybe an upper management BP retirement community on a sandbar along the Gulf coast: one covered with oil. Drop them by helicopter and let them fend for themselves, without assistance. It's just a little of their own harmless oil product.
"If the US government enforced its banking laws like it did its park regulations, we wouldn't be
in this damn park in the first place." OCCUPY.!!
but what the hell does that tweet even say?
Does anyone have a Twitter to English translation? Am I beyond the generation divide now?
The recognition by @sanuzis (a Republican) of the value of the idea and the action is where the Netroots need to go. Ideas to action.
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2010/06/0...
but don't those clear up what's spilled? This idea is intended to stop the spilling.
...to this proposal is why the hell not?
It's cheap, it can be constructed in a few days and it's worth a try. BP should be *forced* into trying this method immediately. Their attempts have all failed and it's not like we don't have other leaks out there already that it could be used for if it works. We NEED a massive hit-it-with-everything approach to advance the technology and mitigate further spills.
Attention. Getting attention, or a response is somewhat insane. There should be someone in front as a point person looking for ideas and bubbling them up, but as I mentioned, we seem to live in a process-laden risk averse culture.
Trying this would cost them about 15 minutes of oil flow at its current rate. It wouldn't do harm (or more harm) to the gulf and if it succeeded, would be a prototype for other projects. If it didn't, perhaps it would spark ideas for how to make it work or even another solution.
If BP is in receivership and the government builds the straw, is it OUR milkshake? I think so.
Website || Twitter
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKQ3LXHKB34
Once it's America's milkshake, at taxpayer expense, news will shift to the next crisis, surely brewing somewhere. Mission Accomplished (for corporations everywhere)-- cha ching. It seems to be a pattern.
"If the US government enforced its banking laws like it did its park regulations, we wouldn't be
in this damn park in the first place." OCCUPY.!!
and the surface any natural gas in the stream will expand about 140 times it's original volume. Not 140 percent. While Red Green would heartily approve of this elegant design I'm not sure I'd want to be anywhere near it. Just saying.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
Bag go boom.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
To vent the gas as it rises?
they would, along with the oil. But they better not be small holes. If the amount of oil were "nominal" that might even be acceptable but I wouldn't want to be on a ship with natural gas burbling up all around me. One spark and you have two rigs on the bottom.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
n/m
and some is dissolving in seawater and some is doing exactly what you'd expect bubbling to the surface over a large surface area. There are only certain stochiometric ranges in which it is danger of exploding. There's lots of video of Ixtoc, a relatively shallow well, where the gas is coming to the surface in explosive or combustible concentration. I merely point out that if you guide it to the surface in the manner described you will have explosive concentrations at the surface and you'd better be prepared to deal with it. Now if I were designing this thing there wouldn't be a ship topside. I'd suspend the contraption below sea level and enclose the area where the stream emerged in a large super boom, water quenched, and set the whole mess on fire.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
I just got off the phone with Shoq, who says there are different solutions for the gas, but the unknown is how much of what's coming out from the well is gas and how much isn't.
This certainly isn't the worst idea I've ever seen. It needs some finesse is all.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
I want to hear what Fishgrease (of DKos) has to say about this idea! Fishgrease is a production oil well engineer who has been blogging diaries over at DKos since this thing started. Anyone know how to ping him and get his attention?
I don't know what his involvement and/or approval is on this.
I emailed Fishgrease and this was his reply (he invited me to post it on his behalf):
"Looks good with one problem. It doesn't handle the gas.
The entire flow needs to be collected into some sort of huge separator. A tanker would actually work for that (a tanker is an excellent, huge, horizontal separator), but you need to tell them to get specific on that connection and routing the gas to a safe flare. Gas and oil in one end -- gas out the other.
Also, there has to be a way to open access, easily, any time, to the BOP.
Maybe just pull the curtain up!
Have them make a separate drawing of the boat connection with the gas-out specified and I'll have another look. Here's a trick for a flame arrestor (protecting your tanker from backflash from the flare). Bubble your gas up through tank of water before it goes to the flare. A water bath, so to speak. They work great and you don't have to worry about your tanker launching if it gets a little O2 in it for whatever reason -- and if that can happen, it will.
Then, once you're all done and it's a great design, you have to get someone to look at it. Not a journalist. Not a movie star. Someone who can make them look at it. If you're expecting me to say that's me... it's not. I've no idea how to make them listen. I've no clue, and very little hope."
He also said in a followup email that since this idea is very similar to that from Eric Lewis, he should be brought in to help refine the idea. I note on the shoqvalue.com web site some reference to Lewis' idea, so it is clear they are aware of him - Fishgrease said that it would be silly for them not to be collaborating. I agree, if this is really a serious effort.
At some point he disagreed with some aspect of the implementation and declined further participation.
He had concern about the hydrates. In this plan, methanol is used.
Doing a gas/oil surface separation is not without considerable peril. They've basically limited what the current tophat is handling because of these same physical limitations. If you're prepared to give up the idea of trying to collect and separate and go with a burn off then I think this idea has some serious merit.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
...for reaching out to FishGrease and posting his reply. Much appreciated. I've passed his thoughts along.
If you did something like this, with a few modifications to deal with ducted gas, using dispersants would actually be counter productive. You wouldn't need them and those micelle plumes wouldn't be generated. It definitely has some appeal.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
I suspect he is overwhelmed with requests and emails, but for some reason he continues to reply to my lame queries.
From shoqvalue.com:
It will be a 6' in diameter tube, fashioned from polyethylene plastic already available from a Texas vendor in sufficiently available quantity.
Mr. Grease addresses the use of polyethylene:
"Plastic, especially plastic sheet, degrades rapidly when exposed to volatile hydrocarbons -- of which there are lots here and very very volatile, too. Try pouring some gasoline into a styrofoam cup -- or rather, don't. Even plastic made to be resistant to volatile hydrocarbons ... isn't.
Use non-synthetic fabric. Cotton would work fine. And it's cheap. Your cotton would saturate with water on one side and oil on the other and you got it made."
-Fishgrease
Some grades of LDPE would eliminate the the degradation problem. That stuff is just about immortal but, in fact, you don't want an impermeable membrane. If you use a permeable one then you don't have to worry so much about gas expansion. Personally I'd go with Nomex. It's an Aramid fiber (think Kevlar) which would be much stronger than cotton and wouldn't have the buoyancy problems.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
I'll admit, when I was looking at this design, I wasn't focused on dealing with the NG that's coming up with the oil, my primary focus was the oil, allowing the expanding gas to escape through the permeations in the tube / sheathe / whateveryouwanttocallit.
Unfortunately, I'm a metals guy and polymers and "squishy" things aren't my forte, so I'm SO glad to see someone that can offer some perspective on that aspect of the problem. I really like the idea of a Nomex or other permeable cloth, that is a great idea.
One other consideration of the gas is the effect that it will have on the density of the water as it dissolves. I've run into issues previously of NG dissolving into the water and vessels losing buoyancy (as the water is no longer dense enough to support it). I'd be very interested to talk on capturing this topside.
As the water/gas/oil mix rises to shallower depths, some of the concerns associated with depth are eliminated. For example, at warmer temperatures, clathrate formation ceases to be an issue, so more conventional capture types (e.g., cofferdam) might be usable to contain and direct gas for flaring or capture.
So you intend to burn off 50000 barrels of oil and tens of millions of cubic feet of gas a day for a few months?
All based on your misplaced paranoia that BP is filling those tankers with fake oil?
You guys need to bop on over to theoildrum.com and do some serious reading.
Comments are closed on this entry