ROCKMAN on August 3, 2010 – 8:13am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Parent subthread | Comments top

Will – I’m’ sure one of the major goals of the early SG developers in the EU will be to characterize the decline rates of the various SG plays. Some of the apparently more exciting SG wells in the US had decline rates exceeding 70% PER YEAR. So you might see exciting results that Company X tested it’s SG well at 10 million cu ft per day. But when that well declines to less than 0.5 million cf in two years you probably won’t see Company X issuing a big press release highlighting that fact. That’s what really hurt US producers: we’ve always been subject to low pricing periods so we just hang on till prices get better in 3 or 5 years. But at that time those SG wells will be producing very little. So why not choke the wells back and wait for the higher prices? Some companies can afford to do that but most need the cash flow even if it means destroying the ultimate profitability.

And I’m not retired. I work for a privately owned company. Profit is the goal…not cash flow. So we don’t consider any of the resource plays as viable options. Even more important being private we don’t have to worry about growing our stock price. The desire by public companies in the US to satisfy Wall Street’s demand for ever increasing reserve booking was THE prime motivator for the SG boom IMHO. The SG public companies used unmet price escalations and unrealistic reserve recovery to boost their book value and thus their stock value. Which is exactly why those companies crashed and burned at an unbelievable speed: those values disappeaded in the blink of an eye because they were never real to begin with. There may be a great profit to be made in EU publicly owned SG companies. Just be sure you’re not still holding the stock when the music stops.

That’s clear enough, I’d say.

And BP says if they are required to attach the pipes to the well, they have to remove the cap to do so and it will take three days of free flow……

This sounds so ridiculous.

I am wondering why BP were not made to attach a cap that had a couple of side Tees, valves and elbows on it so that a riser could be easily attached and a a simple valve opened to flow oil?

Sadly, we also got very good at locating/extracting the oil that does exist, which means that, over the coming years, the decline curves will in fact steepen dramatically, since we’re doing such a great job pulling what is there out of the ground in increasingly rapid fashion.

So, no, sadly, although I understand why you, and many others hopelessly tied into the notion we can just consume without any consequences, want to believe peak oil, global warming, and so on, are not real events, Matt Simmon’s unfortunate break from reality I think has very little to do with his 8000 shares.

I think to small time people, who don’t deal in investment matters for a living, such numbers suggest a lot of money, but this is a drop in the bucket of his overall wealth, and isn’t much different than you buying some lottery tickets based on a hunch.

Personally, and this is only my opinion, based on watching him speak recently, and also watching the somewhat repetitive nature of his recent oil statements, I think he’s simply suffering from some mental disorder, possibly alcohol/pharmaceutical drug related, or a slow motion breakdown. And equally unfortunately, the press is giving him a free pass based on his previous excellent work, without even bothering to check his statements for physical possibility.

By the way, if you haven’t read his excellent Twilight in the Desert, I suggest you run out to your local library, if you have one, and check out a copy, if they have it. It’s an excellent read, and was most certainly not produced by the same type of thinking, eg, sloppy, that is producing his current near gibberish statements. Warning, it’s decently technical, and has a lot of facts, so if you’re looking for something to bolster the conspiracy type ideas you seem to be leaning towards, this book probably isn’t for you.

Keep in mind Simmons Inc. has distanced themselves from Matt Simmons in public statements, due to the damage such absurdities he is currently throwing out there could cause their reputation.

Peak oil is just basic geology, and common sense, it’s not particularly complex science. What’s actually worth looking into is the ability of our species to engage in such massive degrees of self-delusion in the face of the increasingly obvious need to change our behavior, or fail as a globally relevant species.

http://blogs.barrons.com/stockstowatchtoday/2010/06/15/bp-simmons-still-sees-bankruptcy-massive-hole-at-the-well-bore/

Simmons is an investment banker and is pushing his offshore wind farm investment, big time. Kind of makes you wonder if Peak Oil is contrived, like so many other “scientific” falsehoods we fell for.

No answers appeared that I saw but I didn’t have time to read the whole thread there on it.

However, one thing is clear, in no case will the well be reused, it will be abandoned as a total loss in all cases, because the well bore is too damaged to ever be used for production purposes. The reservoir will be reused, but not that well bore.

But it’s a real question why they’ve said for weeks now that they can’t put those pressures on the well-bore but now they can. Today’s theoildrum.com BP’s Deepwater Oil Spill – the 3-ram stack thread explains the process fairly well. Part 1 of the thread has links to some Kent Wells videos from BP showing the methods and technologies used, in the comment section.

I think the idea is to test the well for integrity, so they can shut it down in the case of a hurricane. Should know today if that works. Ie, they will add the device, attach the production pipes below the new rams, test them, close the rams, close the BOP valves used now, test pressures, if stable, ie, rising and not showing leaks, will then begin production from the new valves below the rams, basically just using the BOP as a pipe to the new device. I think that’s the idea anyway.

However, given that the only empirical example of a blowout on this well is this same well, it’s relatively easy to see that there’s a lot of trial and error going on, along with political damage control and liability controls, so I’d say some conflicting statements reflect that reality.

Re nuke stuff, as someone involved in the anti nuclear movement told me decades ago, ignore the babble, focus on present disposal of nuclear waste products. If disposal is complete and safe, then nuclear energy is not so bad. It’s definitely better than coal power, which is the dominant source of global electrical production, and, with petroleum based transport, CO2 production. Remember, nuclear waste is not just spent uranium rods, it’s basically everything that came into contact with the radioactive core, and the surrounding plant itself, which generally doesn’t last more than about 50 years.

The proper disposal of ALL waste products has never been reality as far as I know, anywhere on the planet, although recently Monbiot posted a newish method of disposal that apparently is viable, but VERY expensive. It has not I believe been used yet. It involves creating I think copper containment vessels, coated in some type of concrete, then embedding those further in some type of mineral compound, deep in some type of cavern or mine. Apparently that method, if used, does in fact seal the stuff for the multiple 10s of thousands of years required.

All methods that are not currently being used should be considered fantasies, especially fusion. AKA techno-utopianism, on an intellectually equal level to the belief that angels will come down from heaven to clean up all our pollution once God decides that enough is enough, it’s time to start caring for the environment and our ecosystem again. In other words, never.

By the way, the Norwegian government, which tends to be relatively more rational, ie, they don’t allow corporate lobbying to determine public policy as much as the US does, studied thorium as a possible source for nukes and found it to be a non viable option. Thorium is frequently referred to by nuke nuts as a real alternative, but must be considered as yet another fantasy method until proven viable on a large scale. And no, I don’t want to hear any nuke nuts responding here, sorry.

Nuke nuts are a class of techno-utopians that basically believe that all current power can be provided by nukes, and that no major alterations of a non-sustainable life-style need to be made in the present, or the future, except for switching to nuclear energy. Basically they watched too many Star Trek episodes. For a reference point, USA produces something like 3-5 million pounds of uranium yearly, but consumes around 50 million. And global production of that ore are hitting lower and lower quality ores to produce enough to supply greater and greater demand. This doesn’t even look at the problem of toxically radioactive tailings, another thing the nuke nuts tend to totally ignore, since anything is preferable than actually stopping the environmental destruction of our ecosystem. People who believe we can replace more than 90% of our current energy consumption using finite uranium supplies, with no actually existing alternatives, are basically occupying a simplistic faith based religious position, minus the actual essence of religion, which makes it even more absurd.

Conservation is the low hanging fruit, and any position that tries to get around that is a pipe dream, a fantasy, and delusional. Carter knew this in the 70s, as did pretty much everyone else who used reason to examine the question. Everything else is a stop gap measure, though some, very few, countries can have hopes of producing enough electricity to get by, Iceland with geo-thermal, Norway with Hydro. There’s not a lot of other countries on that list though, and that’s about 5 million people out of approaching 7 billion.

Once you ignore corporate / industrial society generated lies about global warming and return to reality, the fact is that global warming was understood and observed (observed, mind you, not predicted) by a Swedish researcher about 100 years ago. Industrial coal production/consumption had already been underway by that time for over 100 years in Europe. The affects of CO2 were also understood that long ago. The only reason there’s been any pretense that this is not the case is because of the massive dependence on hydrocarbon based energy of our industrial society. IE, people refuse to think outside the box that contains them, no matter how much evidence reason presents us. In essence, life without raw material exploitation and non sustainable consumption methods is genuinely unthinkable if we assume our current way of life is viable. That’s growth based economic systems, populations, etc.

I’ll take a look at that book, but the notion that radioactive uranium use causes global warming strikes me as odd to say the least, though I assume there are more valid points in such a book, it’s certain that industry has really squelched a lot of issues with using radioactivity in this way re safety and fundamental principles.

On uranium, I recommend every one to read the book: Atomic Suicide by Walter Russel

What radioactivity is?
How it kills?
What to do about it?
What everyone should know about radioactivity?

The problems with nuclear fuel are many times bigger and insidious than the BP disaster. Order the book and read it to find out what modern science has misunderstood about how the use of uranium will kill the planet. According to Russel it is the cause of global warming. He predicted global warming 50 years before it happened and warned the scientists, but no one listened.

Available at www. philosophy.org

Back to the real reason that I am posting here now is to ask the people who may have some knowledge or understanding of why BP appears to be installing a Christmas tree or some version of a BOP, on the well head and why they then want to try and close the valves on the well? Since according to earlier discussions that no one is sure of the condition of the cementings and casings.

To me this sounds ridiculous to attempt to try and put such pressure on the well or and formation.

At least this is what the media reported today.

Are they going to try and save the well and make it a producer?

Not all drillers are arrogant in this way, ROCKMAN who has been posting in theoildrum.com a lot for example does not allow any shortcuts or cowboy methods to be used on the rigs he is responsible for. So it’s more of an IQ/greed test, some pass and some fail.

In Norwegian drilling for example, such practices are simply not tolerated, since they are basically stupid business practices, as well as potentially toxic and lethal to both human life and the environment.

As for the example I set, unfortunately I’m not very consistent at setting such tones, that comes and goes, but my background should, allegedly, make it more consistent than it actually is, sad to say. But thanks for the kind words anyway.

There’s a few things worth keeping in mind that unfortunately we moderns aren’t keeping in mind: Heraclites noted that there is intelligence only in what surrounds humans, not in them. I’m not totally clear on the actual meaning of the Greek term that is translated by ‘intelligence’, but I’m fairly certain it’s something more wide ranging than our word.

Second is Lao Tzu’s observation that humans are unable to use knowledge non-destructively, for the same reason as noted above, what we think we know is never adequate to the actual world and reality that surrounds us. BP is simply a microcosmic example of this problem. But by no means should it be considered as unique, sad to say.

The entire notion of drilling oil to create and maintain a massively unsustainable system and population and consumption pattern is one of the strongest proofs I’ve ever seen regarding the above two observations. Same for coal and uranium.

So in general, while this tiny example found in the BP blowout is fascinating on a technical and environmental level, it’s really just a reminder that what we are trying to do, with increasing desperation as we grasp at increasingly volatile energy sources, is simply not a viable forward path.

Personally I rank these personal first hand reports of something someone said who was directly involved with the companies involved in the region involved far higher than blanket condemnations from someone who never declares actually why we should pay attention to them.

While this isn’t of course a first hand report, I do consider a firsthand report coming from a friend then rereported as essentially firsthand, such as your example, since this is not a court of law, more just an attempt to actually figure out what really happened. Courts of law, of course, are merely there to assign legal responsibility, within a legal structure, and as such often have little to nothing to do with reality or truth.

However, thanks for your feedback, it’s part of a puzzle that is certainly interesting to watch develop, and fits with what a few other posters who also directly knew people involved had said. Then reread the thread here and ask yourself just why some people are able to state so categorically that certain statements are false, without even having been there or having worked for the companies in question. I call it spin control, increasingly common on the internet, ie., people get paid to do it, or have actually internalized the corporate cultures so much that they do it for free.

So there you have it I heard about this weeks ago, a few days after the event, all the way over here in scotland and told as fact from a very good friend who works in the oil business – stories match a 100% so as far as I’m concerned I take it as fact (did anyways).

Also worth noting, that as far as I’m aware schlumberger have loads of data about the hours leading up to the event from their logs – ie they have most of the facts.

best!

Matt is just making this stuff up out of thin air.

the bop unit is attached to a heavily cemented set of drill casings, and the oil is spurting out of the top of it. This is a fact, there is not an alternate universe about 50 miles off the shore in the Gulf, at least not one that anyone other than Matt seems to have been able to discover.

Every single thing Matt said in his recent interviews was false, except one thing, the amount of the oil spill is larger than the initial 5k barrel per day, the government sponsored original estimate. BP, it should be noted, never released an official spill amount, for liability reasons.

There is no plume of solid black oil, the bop is attached to the drill casing strings. There is no crack that lets the oil out 6 to 7 miles away.

Not one iota of evidence for this exists except for his ill considered remarks. Simmons and company has publically and officially repudiated Simmons and has explicitly stated that his views do not correspond to theirs.

The statement that the research vessel had discovered vast black plumes of heavy oil is categorically false. They found faint cloud like formations of tiny oil droplets that did not retain concrete form, and in fact which often could not even be discovered again when they passed over the same area again.

Even his comments about bringing in super tankers to suck up the oil/water mixture is not based on any reality that anyone except one person who says he did this for the Saudis in 93 during the biggest oil spill in history, unreported. The oildrum recently analyzed the claims of that oil spill, and found them wanting, and the Saudis categorically deny such a spill ever occured (though they are not reliable when it comes to honesty, in general, such a spill would be detected by satellites and no such reports have ever surfaced).

In fact, as the weeks have passed, every single thing Simmons said has been shown to be not just false, but totally false.

The only point he was sort of right about was the overall oil quantities. As it’s turning out, it could be up to 60k barrels per day, although when he made the claim, pre riser cut and cappiing of bop unit, it may have been 40k barrels per day.

The comments about the casing feeding the bop, as if the casing could shoot out, and then a 450 ton bop unit could drive this casing back down into the mud at almost perfect vertical, is so absurd that it’s not even worth discussing, unless you want to also talk about UFOs and Aliens landing at the bottom of the Gulf and trying to feed off our oil lines, which of course is the true cause of this leak. Oh, man… I shouldn’t have said that, now they are going to get me!!

But seriously, look at the videos, you can see this for yourself, every phase has been on video, live, streaming, every day.

Even his claims on the pressure of the formation, about 40k PSi, are patently absurd, and off by a factor of about 3, the real pressures, logged by BP in the drilling, is about 13k PSI, 12,900 to be precise.

So on every level, Simmons is basically undermining all the good will he has helped create for the concept of peak oil over almost a decade, and he’s doing it in a self-destructive manner that should be causing his true friends true concern.