Even though modern oil wells contain
blowout preventers that are designed to reduce the risk of a blowout, these types of accidents still occur.
The tale of the Deepwater Horizon disaster is, at its core, the tale of two
blowout preventers: one mechanical, one regulatory.
The regulations also strictly control the types and amounts of fluids pumped into wells, require redundant safety devices, increase the frequency of inspections of critical emergency equipment — known as
blowout preventers — and require offshore operators to take steps to center pipes inside wells when pumping cement into them.
Failure of
blowout preventers to halt a sudden rush of oil and gas has been cited as one of the chief contributors to the April 2010 BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill disaster.
The bill requires that any company seeking a drilling permit must first guarantee that it could prevent any future blowouts; promptly stop any blowout, even if
the blowout preventers and other measures fail; and drill a relief well within 90 days of any blowout.
-- Dot Earth reader notes Transocean described troubles with
blowout preventers in November, 2009, drilling newsletter: / / j.mp / BlowoutTrbl.
In only six of those cases were the wells brought under control, leading the researchers to conclude that in actual practice,
blowout preventers used by deepwater rigs had a «failure» rate of 45 percent.
The story shows how companies doing offshore oil drilling had shifted progressively to cutting the risk of failure by adding a second blind shear ram to
blowout preventers.
For all their confident pronouncements about
blowout preventers (the «ultimate failsafe device,» some called it), oil industry executives had long known they could be vulnerable and temperamental.
But it just takes one for us to have a wake - up call and recognize that claims that fail - safe procedures were in place, or
that blowout preventers would function properly, or that valves would switch on and shut things off, that — whether it's because of human error, because of the technology was faulty, because when you're operating at these depths you can't anticipate exactly what happens — those assumptions proved to be incorrect.
Later this summer, we'll probably be debating the need for sonar shut - off valves on
blowout preventers.
Nor did the agency certify
blowout preventers, but instead allowed companies like BP to certify the equipment themselves.
PET scanners and undersea oil - well
blowout preventers are still pretty different, for example.
With headquarters in London and Houston, the combined company will have roughly $ 23 billion in annual revenue and offer oilfield gear including
blowout preventers, pumps, drilling, chemicals, other products and services for oil producers in 120 countries.
Never again, they vowed, would the planet be forced to sit by, powerless, while oil execs confessed — after the fact — that stopping a leak at such depths is like performing «open - heart surgery at 5,000 feet in the dark,» as BP America's chairman and president, Lamar McKay, told ABC News about the early attempt to plug the well by triggering the failed
blowout preventer.
Remote imaging of the failed
blowout preventer, stress testing various containment devices as well as other high - tech tasks helped contain the Deepwater Horizon disaster
The report says the panel has not yet had time to work out why
the blowout preventer, a giant valve on the seafloor which should have stopped the flow of oil as a measure of last resort, failed to activate.
A new capped
blowout preventer that BP has installed may avert that in future.
When BP scientists couldn't figure out how
the blowout preventer failed, Chu suggested gamma - ray imaging, which could visually pierce the giant piece of equipment at the bottom of the sea.
Even when BP began pumping oil and gas through a line from
the blowout preventer to the Q4000 well - servicing ship — at Garwin's suggestion — the flow of oil into the sea remained undiminished.
What finally worked on July 12 was a smaller
blowout preventer installed atop the failed
blowout preventer at the well's head on the seafloor, replacing the top hat.
«We know automatic systems did not close it, we know workers hit the manual switch before evacuating the rig, and we have been trying since hours after the incident to activate
the blowout preventer [using remotely operated vehicles] and that has not been successful.»
There's still a lot that could go wrong: the mud now flowing from the leak points could end up hollowing out more of
the blowout preventer, ultimately making the spill worse.
Image: The mobile offshore drilling unit Q4000 holds position directly over the damaged Deepwater Horizon
blowout preventer as crews work to plug the wellhead using a technique known as «top kill,» May 26, 2010.
One thing to watch for is the fountains of mud spewing from the leak sites in
the blowout preventer and riser pipe to die down as BP brings the pumping down — that may have already happened.
There was a failure of the «
blowout preventer,» an undersea fail - safe device that is supposed to close off a gushing pipe.
Anyone doing a basic worst - case scenario for deep wells would have to consider having a plan should
a blowout preventer fail.
One could well be the way it chose the basic design of the well — not just the infamous failed
blowout preventer on the top, but the entire system from the seabed to the oil source deep below.
Postscript: The Department of Energy has released a large amount of information on the wrecked BP well and components such as
the blowout preventer.
[420] On 19 August, Admiral Thad Allen ordered BP to keep
the blowout preventer to be used as evidence in any court actions.
There was a «
blowout preventer», but this was not a «fail - safe device».
Very important were the ALARP risk management requirements for a near drilling location
blowout preventer capping stack, and relief well drilling unit.
The regulatory
blowout preventer failed long before BP ever started to drill — precisely because Salazar kept in place the crooked environmental guidelines the Bush administration implemented to favor the oil industry.
As for the BP leak, on 12 May 2010 California Democrat Representative Henry Waxman said that the House Oversight and Investigations subcommittee investigation into the Gulf oil spill revealed that the Deepwater Horizon Macaondo oil platform's
blowout preventer (BOP) did not pass a crucial pressure test just hours before the explosion.
He initially served on Transocean's internal investigation team, helping to direct efforts related to the forensic examination of
the blowout preventer.
He handled interactions with the governmental agencies involved in the forensic examination and led efforts to secure a neutral testing site for
the blowout preventer, all in a politically charged atmosphere.
Not exact matches
blowout -
preventer bop34 bp234 congress deepwater - horizon gulf - of - mexico halliburton interior - department macondo - well oil - leak oil - spill