(31 July 2010 – hydrocomgeo@gmail.com)
Return to main article:
Why is BP's Macondo blowout so disastrous & Beyond Patch-up.
Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.


















(31 July 2010 – hydrocomgeo@gmail.com)
Return to main article:
Why is BP's Macondo blowout so disastrous & Beyond Patch-up.
This is a real service to all of us who are trying to understand the dynamics of the situation and what we can expect from this and future circumstances like it. I had a general concept of the geology of the area but these pictures are a fantastic help. Thanks, BK Lim!
Thanks BK Lim.That's some really good work.Even I can see the work clearly now.
These are fabulous drawings! Seeing them larger helps immensely! Thank you!
I can see why you want to do this as a video--
I understand what happened so much better, and thank you so very much for this article-- it IS a real service to the rest of us!
I'm clipping away!
Holy effing crap!
Thanks for this, and thanks to Dowser for directing me here.
And I agree that this would be even more immensely powerful animated. Any Viners out there who are handy with 3D Max or equivalent? I know folks who could do this in Unigraphics, but that's an expensive tool. 3ds Max, I think, is available on a trial basis.....
Clipped!
Thanks. That's a great explanation. I sent this to my brother who is a drilling fluids specialist to see what he has to say. Does it mean the relief wells have little chance of working?
Does it mean the relief wells have little chance of working?
I've seen numbers as low as 30% chance.
They need to sit back think out a better less damaging strategy instead of thinking about CYA all the time. It's like a small camp fire that has gotten out of control and threatening to consume the whole forest. My worry is that they are more concern with the public relationship at the expense of fundamental damage. We have seen great solutions coming out of disasters and this should be one of them. If sound minds do not prevail over selfish intentions, then all is lost.
Can see a lot of efforts had been put into it. Helps layman like me to separate the BP's PR noise from the truth. We need more genuine voices like this to speak out. Thanks BK for your effort.
Thank you so much for posting this BK. The visuals helped me to understand what happened. This is so disturbing to say the least.
If sound minds do not prevail over selfish intentions, then all is lost.
This is what I fear the most. :-(
Thank you for these articles and the application of your expertise on a pro bono basis. You have provided a lucid explanation for many of the dynamics observed in MC252.
Big salt dome. How fast will it break down ?
Solubility - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
One also speaks of solid solution, but rarely of solution in a gas (see ..... Some ionic compounds (salts) dissolve in water, which arises because of the ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solubility - Cached - SimilarWikiAnswers - Can salt dissolve in oil
Science question: Can salt dissolve in oil? Salt cannot dissolve in oil. This is because salt is a non-polar substance, because it's bonds are non-polar ...
wiki.answers.com/Q/Can_salt_dissolve_in_oil - Cached - Similar
It's been there since the Jurassic, jbdaad, so it's not going to melt away anytime soon and, while some of it does dissolve, part of it is composed of calcium sulfate and forms a cap rock up to 2,000 feet thick. Salt domes in the Gulf are vertically elongated, cylindrical formations that are generally 1-3 miles in diameter. They're buried in sediment that can be up to 20,000 feet thick and commonly feature faults and fractures due to movement from sediment loading. Some contain cavernous voids.
Ty Briwnys.
Is there a handy before and after map ?
Especially of the top of that salt dome ? I know surveys are/should be available to see how far it has slumped.
Actually, that's general information, based on the area. For specifics, you'll have to consult an expert like BK Lim or Dowser.
Briwnys
I am no expert on salt dome or local geology either. But you have a good source for local information. You know geology is something you cannot export out. You can take out the oil but not the geology.
You can take out the oil but not the geology.
Care to expand on that...can you also tell me how big of a void is down there ? I see you have it slumping on your graph...it looks very neat...also...what moves faster down there...Gas or oil ?
eventually you have to marry science with our current conditions.
Great work! Excellent illustrations and explanation. As a complete layman, I was having an awful time making sense of a lot of this stuff. I could not understand how capping this thing off was somehow forcing material out other areas when mother nature had contained things just fine before, but this lays it all out really nice!
Also, do you have any opinion on methane bubble induced tsunami, or surface methane explosion tsunami, or seafloor collapse tsunami. I've heard a lot of talk about possible tsunamis, but one thing I haven't heard is whether a lightning strike could set off a large methane cloud and what might result from that. One more thing: Is there any chance of a sea floor collapse or destabilization that could induce an earthquake, such as New Madrid? TIA.
First of all I would like to assure everyone that I am no alarmist and my models and theories on the GWSF hazards had been proven over the years, albeit silently since no one gives you a hoot or credit when the threat of disaster was successfully removed. I do not think I am the only one. There must be many among us in our own fields and lines of work. I am putting my 30 years of my professional reputation at risk by speaking up and risk being "unemployable" after this. I will be posting an article shortly summarising all this so that everyone gets the right perspective. I have weighed the risks (as I have for most of my past geohazards work) and understand the sacrifices needed. Appreciate all your support and the free flow of criticisms and discussions as it should be for something good to come out of all this. Thank you. Now to answer your questions:
I must admit I am as "blank" as most outsiders unfamiliar with the Gulf's local geology and specifics. I am bringing myself to speed by reading as much as possible and will only concentrate on areas I am comfortable in.
methane bubble induced tsunami, or surface methane explosion tsunami, or seafloor collapse tsunami.
I've heard a lot of talk about possible tsunamis, but one thing I haven't heard is whether a lightning strike could set off a large methane cloud and what might result from that. One more thing: Is there any chance of a sea floor collapse or destabilization that could induce an earthquake, such as New Madrid? TIA.
Briwnys has given a brilliant answer to your question at #13. I will just add that I along with everyone else sincerely wish the relief well will successfully plug the broken well from the bottom. However we need to be convinced the gush is plugged properly and permanently - no half way measures. Once the drilling rigs and ROVS move off, the world will be blind. A poorly plugged well will continue to "leak" out oil and gas at the same pressure. It might not leak out through the well but enough damage is already done. There is no guarantee the oil and gas will not find new pathways to the surface. The defective plug may not be evident immediately, maybe after months or years. By then the leaks to the seafloor will be another set of statistics. And that is what I fear most.
BK Lim
What do you make of this report?
http://nyghtshayde.newsvine.com/_news/2010/08/02/4804386-wtf-magnitude-30-louisiana?last=1280809599&threadId=1033387&sp=0&pc=25&commentId=16181242#c16181242
That is why our parents taught us not to play with fire crackers. Many of the precarious geological situations built up over the years (hundreds to millions) can be triggered in a variety of ways. For example in the 2004 tsunami, at my survey site thousands of miles away, we noted a mis-match in our water depths. Thank god for the multibeam swath the mismatch was obvious hours later.
After the Tsunami, thousands of fishes died and surfaced in one of the world's largest mined out lake behind the office where we were working. Apparently the earthquake had triggered the release of H2S/methane gas that had accumulated (migrated through the faults) beneath the sediment layers at the lake bottom. The vibration was very low just enough to crack some shoddy pasted tiles that dropped to the ground from more than 18 floors. Luckily no one was hurt or it would have generated some headlines.
Another factor we should consider is when we built large mega dams. I have read that the recent earthquakes were the result of adjustment and shifts due to accumulation of large body of water.
One question why would the HAARP be used now? Is there some secret projects going on?
It could be subsidence; that is rather far from the Gulf for it to be depletion from the spill, but the oil reservoir extends about 200 miles inland and there is no real bedrock anywhere near the surface in that area. In fact, Clinton would be right about at the northern limit of the deep sediment area; leaks occur from near the Texas border to that part of Louisiana all the way across to central Alabama and down to the coast. I am approximately 225 miles northwest of Clinton and didn't feel anything up this far, but then, we're on bedrock here.
There is ample literature to suggest that human intervention can trigger seismic events and other major earth changes, so I think BK Lim is correct with his "firecrackers" analogy.
There have been instances all over the world of earthquakes accompanying impoundment of water in reservoirs. Perhaps the most famous example in the United States is that of Hoover Dam, completed in 1935. Hundreds of earthquakes occurred as the water level rose. Since it reached its peak of 475 feet in 1939, the level of seismicity has fluctuated in direct response to water level. None of the shocks has been particularly damaging--the largest was about magnitude 5--but the area had no record of being seismically active.
Mark, I am nowhere near an expert but I am familiar with the area. Seafloor composition - salt dome intrusion into literally thousands of feet of sediment layers, all glued together by methane hydrates - is highly unstable here. Landslides are common, even on slopes with only a slight incline, and the extent of the slides is greater than on land. Some release of methane is to be expected under these conditions, but the scenarios projected, of earthquakes, tsunamis and exploding methane bubbles, are highly unlikely under normal conditions.
That is not to say that an earthquake or tsunami could not happen - NOAA has set up the buoys and included the Gulf in its tsunami watch network - but while earthquakes do occur, most often in the Southern extent of the Gulf, they do not occur to the degree that has been described by doomsayers, and only rarely at all within the Northern Gulf.
A disastrous release of methane gas or an extensive seafloor collapse is not impossible but the possibility is remote. The size of the oil and gas deposit is estimated to be very large and the leak may not stop until the reservoir is depleted. Sinkholes can occur. Those are conditions we need to assess more fully before we can offer a realistic prediction of what could happen. Without the specific knowledge of someone who is an expert on salt domes and the local geology, that is the most any responsible person can say at this point.
POSTED ABOVE: Science question: Can salt dissolve in oil? Salt cannot dissolve in oil. This is because salt is a non-polar substance, because it's bonds are non-polar ...
wiki.answers.com/Q/Can_salt_dissolve_in_oil - Cached - Similar
Salt cannot dissolve in oil; however water does dissolve salt. Productive sandstone is actually highly consolidated individual grains of sand, with varying sizes and shapes. In between the sand grains are what is called pore spaces. Think of gathering a group of rocks of relatively the same size; and stacking them in a pile. You will see that there are spaces between the rocks. Now in the productive formation these spaces (pore spaces) are contain oil, gas AND what is known as "Interstitial Water." Due to various conditions, within the productive sand and the rate at which the well is produced (I will leave the technical's out); the oil, gas and interstitial water (and possibly sand itself) will be produces out of the pore spaces at different rates. Normally the well will be produced at a reduced rate (choked back) from what the maximum it is capable of producing, in order to reduce or hold back the interstitial water and the production of sand. In a blown out well; it is flowing at the maximum rate at which the well is capable; and thus is producing oil, gas, water and sand. The sand has an abrasive effect on the tubing and casing and the annulus between the production casing and the well bore. The produced water is additive in the erosive effects of an uncontrolled flow. Here is the rub: A blownout well drilled through or near a salt dome (or salt dome overhang) allows the interstitial water to contact the salt and dissolve it; creating a cavernous situation. This in my mind is the absolute worst case scenario; and one which I have worried about since the blowout. There was an incident in S.W. Louisiana; where a well was drilling in Lake Pelto. The well drilled into a salt dome before ever encountering a productive formation. The water from the lake dissolved the salt and a whirlpool effect ensued; resulting in and the entire rig being sucked into the salt dome cavern. Everything around the well was sucked into the vortex. There was one Support Tug Boat that was sucked into the Salt Cavern; but was burped back out. The entire Lake was drained into the salt Cavern.
I think he meant the Lake Peigneur incident, jbdaad, not Lake Pelto. Here's the Wiki account.
oldoiloperator
Now that's a scary thought. Perhaps that's why BP decided against using the relief wells after all.
Why do you think seafloor collapse was among the worst case scenarios that popped into my mind when this first happened?
I do not mean it that way. The whole seafloor will not collapse as in the lake scenario. Obviously the erosion as pointed aptly by oldoiloperater will increase over time but it would not be in the magnitude of the Lake Peigneur. There was already active salt mining below and probably the erosion/solution thru some fractures, had been going on for some time. The drilling came, weaken and trigger the eventual collapse of the sink holes.
In BP's case, the relief wells might not be used after considering the high possibility of collapse and the fragility of the situation after months of oil gush. Perhaps they didn't intend to use them in the first place.
Maybe you could explain what seafloor collapse could otherwise mean in this particular region of the Gulf, BK - see my comments here beginning with #2 for how I've been interpreting it. Other than sinkholes, there is the comment by Paul Noel, where he wrote, "The collapse of rock structures is even more scary. Mexico has one entire state that is being held up by nitrogen injection wells that would sink if that gas is released. This is not funny stuff." More scary but less likely IMO.
I believe that long before to make decision to drill, the drilling procedure has to be accepted by a special International Comity to approve the procedure for enough is enough with this kind of accidents that affect the Environment.
It is enough that sometimes happen with means of transportation such as Ships, not also with drilling procedure, I do not like for it to happen again, enough is enough.
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. You're in XHTML Mode. If you prefer, you can use Easy Mode instead. (XHTML tags allowed - a,b,blockquote,br,code,dd,dl,dt,del,em,h2,h3,h4,i,ins,li,ol,p,pre,q,strong,ul) |