BP Thought Spill Could Be 100-Times Larger Than It Told Congress, According To Internal Document

NEW ORLEANS - Newly released internal documents show BP PLC estimated 4.2 million gallons of oil a day could gush from a damaged well in the Gulf of Mexico if all equipment restricting the flow was removed and company models were wrong.

Democratic Massachusetts Congressman Ed Markey released the documents Sunday showing BP said in a worst-case scenario the leak could gush between 2.3 million and 4.2 million gallons of oil per day.

The current worst-case estimate of what's leaking is 2.5 million gallons a day.

The documents anticipate a scenario where the blowout preventer and other equipment on the sea floor were removed, which was never done.

BP provided the documents to federal officials in May, and company officials say they have no plans to remove the blowout preventer.

In a press release from the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, which Markey chairs, the BP estimate is described as up to 100-times larger than their initial claim:

In the document, BP stated: If BOP and wellhead are removed and if we have incorrectly modeled the restrictions - the rate could be as high as ~ 100,000 barrels per day up the casing or 55,000 barrels per day up the annulus (low probability worst cases) ...

This number is in sharp contrast to BP's initial claim that the leak was just 1,000 barrels a day. At the time this document was made available to Congress, BP claimed the leak was 5,000 barrels a day, and told Members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee that the worst case scenario was be 60,000 barrels a day. This document tells a different story.

Click here for a PDF of the internal document.

Comments

[hollybork]

08:58 PM on 06/23/2010

Today Oil Drum reports the Deepwater Horizon underground oil reservoir is one of the biggest in the US.

"The mean size is around a million barrels per reservoir.
The size of the reservoir is important for several reasons. Specifically, the more oil in the Macondo reservoir, the longer the oil leak will flow if the efforts to cap it fail.

Moreover, higher volumes of oil and gas might change the pressure of materials gushing out of the leaking well. As CBS notes:

"The oil emanating from the seafloor contains about 40 percent methane, compared with about 5 percent found in typical oil deposits, said John Kessler, a Texas A&M University oceanographer...

"I will leave it to the scientists to calculate what a larger volume of oil (with 40% methane) would mean for pressure. Higher pressure may make it harder to cap the leak, and may wear out the casing quicker by speeding up the rate at which sand and other small particles in the oil abrade the metal. Lower pressure would ease both problems.

"A billion barrel reservoir shows up just off the right edge of the scale. Extrapolating, that size reservoir places it in the 99.96% percentile of USA reservoirs in the Gulf. For comparison, Mexico's Cantarell is 10 times this size (and 10x as rare).....Again that makes it above the 99.9% percentile in rarity."

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6642

[GeorgeMilquetoast]

04:27 PM on 06/22/2010

XtanyaX, you wrote:
"So [the oil reservoir] would be under the same pressure without having been punctured?"

It would be under the same or slightly greater pressure if the reservoir had never been punctured.

"Out of interest when there is an earthquake does oil ever start to leak?"

This question is best answered by a petroleum geologist. The oil reservoir would need to be located in a fault zone, and an earthquake would have to propagate the fault into the oil reservoir. If that were to happen, then the oil could leak into the fault. If the fault were to then open onto the seabed floor or the land surface, then you might get spontaneous leakage of crude oil into the ecosystem.

"Also: What could they use for a very dense material?

They use "drilling mud". It's not really mud. So-called "drilling mud" is an engineered material. Here's a reference that might help explain it better. http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-drilling-mud.htm . The mud engineer determines the mud density.

"Do you think the drill column (having undoubtedly been made out of the cheapest, lowest quality material) withstand high pressures (from upwards and downwards forces) without cracking?"

A drill column with adequate spacers to properly concentrically align multiple pipes can support tremendous vertical forces. If too few spacers are used, then the pipes may not be concentric, implying poor cement seal distribution and potential loss of pressure control.

[XtanyaX]

12:01 PM on 06/23/2010

Hi GeorgeMilquetoast,

“They use "drilling mud". It's not really mud. So-called "drilling mud" is an engineered material. Here's a reference that might help explain it better. http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-drilling-mud.htm . The mud engineer determines the mud density.”

Thank you very much for the link which is also a good resource for related topics.

“A drill column with adequate spacers to properly concentrically align multiple pipes can support tremendous vertical forces. If too few spacers are used, then the pipes may not be concentric, implying poor cement seal distribution and potential loss of pressure control.”

Since they would be using the same drill column – can one assume it would be the latter?

Why are they not doing this (using the “drilling mud”) already? I guess it would ruin their inve$tment?

Thanks again

[GeorgeMilquetoast]

01:48 PM on 06/23/2010

Information released to the Coast Guard indicates that too few spacers were used in order to shorten BP's installation time by ten hours. TEN LOUSY HOURS. This would also imply that the likelihood of good cement seals was reduced. Bad cement seals would account for an uncontrolled release of methane gas up the riser, along with the inadequate amount of drilling mud that the Deepwater Horizon has already put in the well. All that drilling mud came up before the methane gas reached the deck of the Deepwater Horizon and exploded.

They already tried to use drilling mud during the so-called "top-k.i.l.l" method by applying it from the top but it failed due to too much outflow of drilling mud through the badly damaged/severed riser. You need to produce a lot of pressure to drive the drilling mud down into an upflowing gusher, and having leaks in the piping dramatically reduced the pressure at the well-head.

A so-called "bottom-k.i.l.l" will place the drilling mud at the base of the well-bore just above the oil reservoir, and will allow the natural pressure of the reservoir to drive the drilling mud up into the well column. The higher the column of drilling mud is lifted, the lower the pressure at the BOP, until the drilling mud is lifted high enough to finally overcomes the natural pressure of the reservoir.

[Roger DiPaolo]

12:02 PM on 06/22/2010

FLOWIN’ IN THE GULF

How many roads must a man drive down, before you call him a man?
How many seas must a pelican sail, before she can sleep in clean sand?
Yes and how many times must oil be spilled, before it is forever banned?

Refrain:

The answer my friend, is flowin’ in the gulf,
The answer is flowing in the gulf.

Yes and how many years can an oil rig exist, before it fails you and me?
Yes and how many years can some people exist, in a world of dying seas?
Yes and how many many times can you turn your head, and pretend that you just don’t see?

(Refrain)

Yes and how many times must a man look up, before he can see a clear sky?
Yes and how many ears must one man have, before he can hear seabirds cry?
Yes and how many deaths will take till he knows, that too many creatures have died?

(Refrain)

------
A free gift to the world, sing and spread widely.....
Credit for inspiration to Bob Dylan, and credit for the subject matter to Big Oil.

[outnow]

12:03 AM on 06/22/2010

BP said there was essentially no risk at all when they applied for a permit. But their internal memorandum indicates a risk of spilling 100,000 barrels per day. When the gusher started, BP under-estimated the spill by a factor of one-hundred times less than they knew it could be.

The government went along with BP's deceptions at every stage.

The fault lies with BP and the government. They are in these deceptions together.

[XtanyaX]

12:27 PM on 06/23/2010

Also nobody was awake enough to read their crisis plan - aside from referring to dead (or relocated) experts, they referred to sea life nowhere near the GOM (walruses??)

BP’s oil spill plan appears woefully inadequate (thestar.com)
http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/820908

At the very least crisis plans should be read and scrutinized by someone in the government....

"The fault lies with BP and the government. They are in these deceptions together."

And I see no improvement.
I don't expect any from BP as they have made their intere$t(s) shockingly blatant.

But I really cannot believe the Obama admin's continued apathy and (IMO) lack of focus - every day matters and they are wasting every day.
Just my opinion

[LouisofEarth]

09:12 PM on 06/21/2010

SAVING THE SHIP(S) CREWS WHEN THE WELL FAILS

Since an event like this is unprecedented, (in so many ways), I will play the Devils Advocate. The well will not be collapsing, as it will be erupting. Some reports say that they are sonar imaging a large bubble of gas forming beneath the rock. If a large enough bubble comes up under the ship(s) they can be sunk. Ships float by displacing water, not methane! A big enough bubble can drop a ship as much as a hundred feet. They have found trawlers in the North Sea resting on top of natural occurring gas leaks. Most of the time, the ships didn't have time to send out a distress call.

If there is any BP management on those ships. you can bet they will tell the captains to ignore all the warnings, right up until the ships and crews are lost. Evil floats, so the BP manager who told them to ignore the warning signs will probably escape unscathed.

Everyone should be wearing life preservers that will give you the time, (and the air), to get you to the surface after your ship is dragged down. Example: Steinke Hood. There may be very little warning time, as the bubble size will tend to increase pretty quickly. When the sonar shows something big coming up from sea bottom, sound the alarms and GET THE HELL OUT OUT OF THERE!

[sandals]

08:45 PM on 06/21/2010

BP has been lying from the beginning, isn't it true that they have to pay a certain dollar amount per gallon of oil spilled?

[platypterus]

04:47 PM on 06/21/2010

100,300 barrels per day. Its been figured out long before now.

[mrjames1]

07:00 PM on 06/21/2010

NOAA scientist on may 1, 2010 had it pegged at 1 bbl/second, here is the video link

http://blog.al.com/live/2010/05/video_shows_federal_officials.html

the original range of 64,000 to 110,000 is 1 bbl/sec +-25% - the rest is just lies

my old estimate was 86,400 from day 1-40. now i think each day 40+ is 205,000 bbl/day.

[platypterus]

03:08 PM on 06/22/2010

You are probably right.

[Alexandra Mandelis]

04:42 PM on 06/21/2010

Each time I see a headline like this, they get easier and easier to believe :(

[mrJJ]

04:14 PM on 06/21/2010

NOAA Research Ship finds depleted oxygen at 1100 meters

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration on Monday released new data from the agency's latest research trip through the Gulf of Mexico, showing concentrations of oil below the surface at more than 3,600 feet below the surface, about 7.5 nautical miles southwest of the BP's blown-out well.

The Thomas Jefferson research ship found evidence of depleted oxygen, a potential sign of microbes digesting oil, in the area. Acoustic and fluorometric instruments likewise indicated the presence of oil. Water samples taken on the trip have not been analyzed.

Since the leak began April 20, attention has been focused on surface oil washing up on environmentally fragile shoreline ecosystems. But "plumes" or "clouds" of oil hovering in the water column below the surface, where myriad marine life eat, breed and swim, has as much or more potential to cause ecological damage to the Gulf, scientists have warned.

The first evidence of undersea concentrations of oil was revealed by University of South Florida scientists, and was subsequently confirmed by NOAA. Monday's results generally coincide with previous data."

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/greenspace/2010/06/gulf-oil-spill-undersea-oil-masses-confirmed-in-tests.html

[mrjames1]

07:01 PM on 06/21/2010

good stuff mrJJ
NOAA has a ton of stuff they are unable to release...

here was their may 1 , 2010 meeting http://blog.al.com/live/2010/05/video_shows_federal_officials.html

[BoTurney]

12:47 PM on 06/21/2010

DRAT! I both hate and love when info comes to light that affirms my conspiracy theories on matters such as this.

Part of me feels vindicated for being right (or at least right-ish) that they were greatly misrepresenting the flow rate...and yet I also feel terrible for the painful truth of how much oil is actually gushing into the Gulf.

What a sad deal. :(

[NewAmericanCenturySucks]

07:33 PM on 06/21/2010

When our theories are MORE far-fetched than those offered by the ruling elite, I have no problem calling them conspiracy theories.

When - as in this case - the opposite is true, I think we should use different terminology.

Personally, I vote for "calling bull$hit".

[BoTurney]

11:20 AM on 06/22/2010

Great point...fanned. :-)

[kingbuzz]

10:18 AM on 06/21/2010

wait till the slick hits kenny bunk port. then we shall see change.

[kingbuzz]

10:17 AM on 06/21/2010

thank you for that one, werallphuktnow.

[MrBadExample]

10:00 AM on 06/21/2010

from the beginning of this event, it's been clear that BP was withholding huge amounts of information and the White House has either been unaware of the withholding or actively encouraging it.

It seems to be the consensus that 'something else' is going on in the GOM that BP won't own up to. The speculation here and other places runs the gamut--the risers are blown out and can't be patched, the intial explosion shattered the seabed and the field is leaking in multiple spots, or the BP crew carelessly drilled into a giant methane bubble that wil hiss and bubble for years. Since no one is willing to address any of these possibilities, one should assume the worst.

But what if the 'worst' is that there's been huge damage to the GOM seabed and oil drilling can no longer be undertaken safely? We already had severe earthquake activity in Haiti this year, and it's possible that the brittle rock at the bottom of the sea can't take any more oil prospecting. The Gulf is nearly a third of our production and is home to the huge Cantarell field that has sustained PEMEX for several decades. If it's no longer possible to drill in the Gulf, we're in huge trouble--the Gulf constitutes a third of our domestic production.

Unfortunately, Obama's silence and his hints that our oil use is no longer sustainable hint in this direction.

[windup]

01:24 PM on 06/21/2010

What if this oil doesn't stop gushing until it is totally drained from where it is. Where does this leave the ocean?

[mrjames1]

07:18 PM on 06/21/2010

the total volume of that area is approx 4 billion barrels, or .67 of a cubic km of oil. in a 2.4 million cubic km Gulf, it is about the equivalent of 2/3 of a quart of oil in an olympic pool.

draw your own conclusions...

[Protect the Environment]

04:53 PM on 06/21/2010

I doubt they were withholding information from the government, maybe what they found out was just so terrible that they didn't know how to go about it. Scared to make it public? Hoping to solve it "somehow"?

http://make-sustainable-choices.com/2010/06/20/this-is-it-gulf-oil-disaster/

But as they did not seem to have found "the solution", the time to let the people know what's coming down on them is long due!

[cphill]

09:32 AM on 06/21/2010

Time to put some of these people in front of a jury. BP has been evasive, at best, and criminal, at worst. At some point, these bigwigs should have their feet held to the fire.

[kurd55]

09:26 AM on 06/21/2010

There's something about the BP execs and congressional oil prostitutes that inspire public flogging, brutal mob head shaving, plus a good tar and feathering.

I say we put it up for a vote.

[cphill]

09:41 AM on 06/21/2010

Put me down for a YES.