0
turtlespeed

So - I have an idea how to close off the leak in the gulf.

Recommended Posts

Quote

Quote

>What I mean is, what if the hose never fills up - the pumps take over
>and decrease the pressure befdore it is an issue?

For that to happen - to recompress the oil into a riser of similar size to bring it to the surface - you'd need to compress all that natural gas back down to its original volume (pipe diameter) and pressure (1500PSI) at a rate of about 100,000 cubic feet per minute. The compressor needed to do that would require approximately 60 megawatts of power. That's most of the output of the biggest naval reactor we have (reactor from a Nimitz-class carrier, which can produce ~100mW.)

For that to work you'd also have to separate the oil and ice from the methane. Not sure how you'd do that at those flow rates.

Also the pump would have to be down there. You can't "suck" any appreciable volume from the surface; you can only get a 15PSI differential doing that due to basic physics.



ok.... completely brainstorming.

I;d seen mentions of "huge bladders" in some leak related story (might even be this thread). speaking conceptually, with a very large volume collection space, wouldn't the methane end up at the top and the oil at the bottom? they could be both pumped off appropriately. Separation would happen naturally. construction of these huge bladders and their position and connection to the leak, is another issue all together. but to solve one part of the problem isn't a bad thing to do.

I think the hardest problem to solve is going to be connecting something to where the oil is leaking. Once they can solve that problem, I'm sure they have other technologies that can do the jobs we're talking about. And even that problem has been solved, but not by ROV a mile away.


What about a cap that has a closable valve on it? That is how they used to cap the surface wells. I know this because I watched a John Wayne movie once.:ph34r::P:)
I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>So what is your solution?

The ultimate solution is probably the transverse well.

> How much effort have you applied to this problem, besides arguing?

An hour or so of research into the composition of the plume, natural gas compressor horsepower requirements, problems with clathrate formation in expanding gases and strength-of-materials research into steel pipe. Also a page of so of calculations to back up the above. How about you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Don't kid yourself dude, this was not a 'contribution'.



At least I have the want to try to fix it. Unlike those that are just posting dribble and expect someone else to do it all for them.


Someone else does have to do it for us. Someone else has to do it for you, too - no matter how many DIY 'solutions' you want to post here. None of us posting here has the expertise or resources to head off into the Gulf and plug the leak.


no, but a completely unworkable and asinine solution we might come up with here, could give an engineer an idea that is workable.

it's called brainstorming.


Evidently it won't make any difference - because ideas don't actually mean anything anymore. - just see the post above yours,[:/]

Just give up - don't try - lay down and roll over and submit. The New Liberal Mantra


Good ideas are worth having. Half-baked ideas from people who have no clue about the engineering issues involved just get in the way.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

How much effort have you applied to this problem, besides arguing?



Should we be judged on effort or results? 'Cos at the end of the day, I think I can safely say we're all tied for last place on feck all.

And, uh, just how much effort went into your masterplan? I can see the movie montage now - frenzied scribbles on scraps of paper, bits of hose being thrown around the garage...
Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>wouldn't the methane end up at the top and the oil at the bottom? they
>could be both pumped off appropriately.

Yes, but you'd have to have some very big bladders to capture it. They're seeing a million gallons of oil a day; that's 12 gallons a _second_ of oil, plus about 1800 cubic feet of natural gas a _second._ They'd have to hold against relative pressures of 1500 PSI or alternatively vent the excess into the water (which appears to be what they're doing now.) Then you'd have to melt and drain the ice that would accumulate so it didn't stop up the valves/piping.

>I think the hardest problem to solve is going to be connecting
>something to where the oil is leaking.

Well, even if they manage to do that, they still can't just "close the valve." The pipe between the BOP and the top of the assembly is not strong enough to handle that pressure, so at best you're going to provide a good mounting structure to another recovery system that can keep pressures below the limits of the top pipe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

How much effort have you applied to this problem, besides arguing?



Should we be judged on effort or results? 'Cos at the end of the day, I think I can safely say we're all tied for last place on feck all.

And, uh, just how much effort went into your masterplan? I can see the movie montage now - frenzied scribbles on scraps of paper, bits of hose being thrown around the garage...


It worked.

It was just on dry land[:/]
I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

How much effort have you applied to this problem, besides arguing?



Should we be judged on effort or results? 'Cos at the end of the day, I think I can safely say we're all tied for last place on feck all.

And, uh, just how much effort went into your masterplan? I can see the movie montage now - frenzied scribbles on scraps of paper, bits of hose being thrown around the garage...


It worked.

It was just on dry land[:/]


I bet you flew to the Moon in your bedroom when you were a kid, too.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

>wouldn't the methane end up at the top and the oil at the bottom? they
>could be both pumped off appropriately.

Yes, but you'd have to have some very big bladders to capture it. They're seeing a million gallons of oil a day; that's 12 gallons a _second_ of oil, plus about 1800 cubic feet of natural gas a _second._ They'd have to hold against relative pressures of 1500 PSI or alternatively vent the excess into the water (which appears to be what they're doing now.) Then you'd have to melt and drain the ice that would accumulate so it didn't stop up the valves/piping.

>I think the hardest problem to solve is going to be connecting
>something to where the oil is leaking.

Well, even if they manage to do that, they still can't just "close the valve." The pipe between the BOP and the top of the assembly is not strong enough to handle that pressure, so at best you're going to provide a good mounting structure to another recovery system that can keep pressures below the limits of the top pipe.



So if I understand your ideas, we would need to bring in another off shore rig and get it up and running, drop the pipe down and make a new connection.

Why couldn't we reinforce the existing pipe? It should be possible to excavate around the existing pipe to a certain depth and place reinforced hydroulic concrete around it for strength. Then attach some type of temporary plug to stop te flow - at least it wouldn't be leaking - even if we have to un plug and let it flow while we attend to the permanent fix. At least it would be stopped in the interim.
I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

It worked.

It was just on dry land[:/]



When I was 7, I made a space ship out of a cardboard box.

It worked!

It wasn't in space though.


When I was 7 I built a space ship - and it acheived an approximate altitude of 4500 feet.

Dad was pissed that I burned the driveway.
I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>Why couldn't we reinforce the existing pipe? It should be possible to
>excavate around the existing pipe to a certain depth . . .

I think they are very wisely not messing with the wellhead at all right now. If the wellhead goes, there's no limit to how fast that reservoir will vent. You could see a billion gallons a day. Heck, you could even see subsea collapses as the hole erodes open and releases all the pressure suddenly.

>and place reinforced hydroulic concrete around it for strength. Then attach
>some type of temporary plug to stop te flow - at least it wouldn't be
>leaking - even if we have to un plug and let it flow while we attend to the
>permanent fix. At least it would be stopped in the interim.

If you mounted a pressure-capable riser with a valve on the top side, built a berm around the entire assembly, encased it all in concrete, examined it to ensure a good seal/good support around the pipe, and then tried closing that valve - that could work. Of course, if you screwed up the concrete job, you might still have that weaker pipe there, but now with absolutely no way to access it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

>Why couldn't we reinforce the existing pipe? It should be possible to
>excavate around the existing pipe to a certain depth . . .

I think they are very wisely not messing with the wellhead at all right now. If the wellhead goes, there's no limit to how fast that reservoir will vent. You could see a billion gallons a day. Heck, you could even see subsea collapses as the hole erodes open and releases all the pressure suddenly.

>and place reinforced hydroulic concrete around it for strength. Then attach
>some type of temporary plug to stop te flow - at least it wouldn't be
>leaking - even if we have to un plug and let it flow while we attend to the
>permanent fix. At least it would be stopped in the interim.

If you mounted a pressure-capable riser with a valve on the top side, built a berm around the entire assembly, encased it all in concrete, examined it to ensure a good seal/good support around the pipe, and then tried closing that valve - that could work. Of course, if you screwed up the concrete job, you might still have that weaker pipe there, but now with absolutely no way to access it.



I'd venture to say that you could get over the risk factor by the over sizing of the diamater of the concrete form. It couldn't be placed in one continuous pour with a slip form. Slip Form, yes, but logistically VERY difficult. 7000 PSI concrete pipe with a wall thickness of a few feet should suffice - But how do we get over the brittleness of the now concrete pipe and get around currents and lateral forces that would try to snap the new structure.



Like a giant hollow pier.
I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

>wouldn't the methane end up at the top and the oil at the bottom? they
>could be both pumped off appropriately.

Yes, but you'd have to have some very big bladders to capture it.

yes, noticed I mentioned "very large" and "conceptually". And while to most people, 1 million gallons is an abstract large number, realistically, it's a sphere about 66 feet in diameter. Pumping that volume off in a day is a matter of how many connections you can make to the bladder. Wouldn't want it all in one pump as it is anyway. but that's not the real problem.
***

>I think the hardest problem to solve is going to be connecting
>something to where the oil is leaking.

Well, even if they manage to do that, they still can't just "close the valve." The pipe between the BOP and the top of the assembly is not strong enough to handle that pressure, so at best you're going to provide a good mounting structure to another recovery system that can keep pressures below the limits of the top pipe.



exactly. provide a good place to connect to, and ensure you're not increasing pressure with whatever you connect to it.

I think the top-hat idea was much what I'm talking about, but using an open structure instead of a closed one.

and yeah, I completely ignored the ice accumulation in my idea above. Thought about it didn't come up with anything good, so left it out.
--
Rob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

>wouldn't the methane end up at the top and the oil at the bottom? they
>could be both pumped off appropriately.

Yes, but you'd have to have some very big bladders to capture it. They're seeing a million gallons of oil a day; that's 12 gallons a _second_ of oil, plus about 1800 cubic feet of natural gas a _second._ They'd have to hold against relative pressures of 1500 PSI or alternatively vent the excess into the water (which appears to be what they're doing now.) Then you'd have to melt and drain the ice that would accumulate so it didn't stop up the valves/piping.

>I think the hardest problem to solve is going to be connecting
>something to where the oil is leaking.

Well, even if they manage to do that, they still can't just "close the valve." The pipe between the BOP and the top of the assembly is not strong enough to handle that pressure, so at best you're going to provide a good mounting structure to another recovery system that can keep pressures below the limits of the top pipe.



So if I understand your ideas, we would need to bring in another off shore rig and get it up and running, drop the pipe down and make a new connection.

Why couldn't we reinforce the existing pipe? It should be possible to excavate around the existing pipe to a certain depth and place reinforced hydroulic concrete around it for strength. Then attach some type of temporary plug to stop te flow - at least it wouldn't be leaking - even if we have to un plug and let it flow while we attend to the permanent fix. At least it would be stopped in the interim.




I think every problem they're trying to solve, already has a solution. But not at that depth. So they're trying to come up with something expedient and simple. because the complex, long term solutions are extremely difficult to implement at that depth.
--
Rob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

It worked.

It was just on dry land[:/]



When I was 7, I made a space ship out of a cardboard box.

It worked!

It wasn't in space though.


When I was 7 I built a space ship - and it acheived an approximate altitude of 4500 feet.

Dad was pissed that I burned the driveway.


He had no idea of the 'genius' in his midst.:D:D


Chuck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>So they're trying to come up with something expedient and simple.
>because the complex, long term solutions are extremely difficult to
>implement at that depth.

Yep. Like the man said, "for every complex problem there is a solution that is simple, neat and wrong." The long term solution is the relief well; until then, stopgap measures will (unfortunately) have to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think a lot of people have no concept of the obstacles confronting the engineers on this project.
To put it in some perspective:

The pressures at that depth is roughly equal to the weight of a Ford Focus pressing down on an area the size of a US 50-cent piece. A lot of hydrulic systems operate at far less pressures.

The pipe they are working with is 21" OD and (from what I am told) 20" ID. An average size male could insert his entire forearm inside the pipe and would barely touch the sides with his fingers (fully extended) and elbow at the same time.

Gasses mixed with the oil expand and cool the oil/water mix to below freezing as they come out of the pipe creating a frozen slush that clogs even huge steel boxes built to capture the oil.

Every movement of the robots must be carefully planned so as not to put it or the other robots in a situation it can't get out of such as tangling in lines, cut pipes flailing at them or falling on them, etc.

Anything reaching from the surface to the well is incredibly heavy due to the distance involved. A 1" diameter steel rod reaching from a surface vessel to the bottom would weigh over 6.5 tons.

Every attempt to stop the flow must first address the question, "What if it doesn't work? Will failure on this attempt prevent future attempts?"

It's not an easy job and I don't envy those whose responsibility it is to come up with an answer.
HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote



Good ideas are worth having. Half-baked ideas from people who have no clue about the engineering issues involved just get in the way.



jiggle the BOP, it works for my toilet.

:D

The BOP stack IS leaning to one side and the lean angle may be increasing. On Sunday they were checking the angle of the connector below the BOP with an inclinometer. Not sure if the lean is from all the work being done on top of the LMRP. It would be pretty bad if it were to break off.

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

>It would be pretty bad if it were to break off.

It would be even worse if the wellhead was starting to go.



If you mean breaking off down near the rock, yeah, way worse.

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Don't kid yourself dude, this was not a 'contribution'.



At least I have the want to try to fix it. Unlike those that are just posting dribble and expect someone else to do it all for them.



Someone else does have to do it for us. Someone else has to do it for you, too - no matter how many DIY 'solutions' you want to post here. None of us posting here has the expertise or resources to head off into the Gulf and plug the leak.



no, but a completely unworkable and asinine solution we might come up with here, could give an engineer an idea that is workable.

it's called brainstorming.



I'm sure the engineers have left the drawing board and are monitoring internet clubs 24-7.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

>So what is your solution?

The ultimate solution is probably the transverse well.

> How much effort have you applied to this problem, besides arguing?

An hour or so of research into the composition of the plume, natural gas compressor horsepower requirements, problems with clathrate formation in expanding gases and strength-of-materials research into steel pipe. Also a page of so of calculations to back up the above. How about you?



And how many years of engineering in different areas that are still relative. This reminds me of another person, last fall, claiming he knew miles more about acft sheetmetal after having limited to no experience vs me w/25+ years exp. I'll gladly admit I have no idea as to what to do with the well simply because I don't understand the issue other than there's a big hole in teh earth spewing raw, crude oil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Don't kid yourself dude, this was not a 'contribution'.



At least I have the want to try to fix it. Unlike those that are just posting dribble and expect someone else to do it all for them.


Someone else does have to do it for us. Someone else has to do it for you, too - no matter how many DIY 'solutions' you want to post here. None of us posting here has the expertise or resources to head off into the Gulf and plug the leak.


no, but a completely unworkable and asinine solution we might come up with here, could give an engineer an idea that is workable.

it's called brainstorming.


Evidently it won't make any difference - because ideas don't actually mean anything anymore. - just see the post above yours,[:/]

Just give up - don't try - lay down and roll over and submit. The New Liberal Mantra


Good ideas are worth having. Half-baked ideas from people who have no clue about the engineering issues involved just get in the way.


This is shaping up like the cliche about opinions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0