Interesing info on the BP disaster... first hand (probably will get locked).

[missouridawg]

I work for a oil field services company and we do millions of bucks with BP each year. I've personally worked on engineering projects that have been deployed on BPs Thunderhorse development.

For those that are interested to know, BP had 2 barriers downhole to prevent (redundancy is prevalent in the oil field) that both failed. My company actually quoted for those pieces of a equipment and we were not awarded the work due to pricing issues (we were too high). So these cement retainers that you guys might've heard of... both of them failed. Another thing not mentioned prevalently is that a seal assembly on a running tool that was supposed to be left down hole to provide a third barrier was inadvertantly pulled out of the hole, because of tool failure (3 times now).

Also, every offshore rig has SCSSV (surface controlled subsurface safety valves). These valves are controlled from surface and are rated up to 25,000 PSI in some instances. If you find a well that is producing at 10,000 PSI, you'll be making tons of a money. Anyways, these valves are used in emergency situations, such as this one. Unfortunately, when you have a major explosion at the wellhead, the control lines used to function the valves are no longer functioning. Now you've basically got a live well, producing from high pressure (downhole in the reservior) to low pressure (gulf of mexico).

Currently, there isn't technology out there that can really shut off a well such as this. This catastrophe is 100% unheard of in the oil field and planning for it would cost billions upon billions of dollars. If all the Gulf of Mexico oil producers were to invest, research, and implement such safety mechanisms, the end user (everyone that uses oil/gasoline as a product) would experience astronomical price increases at the pump and everywhere else (because most goods have to be delivered by a gasoline/diesel powered vehicle).

I saw that this was a hot topic and thought I'd share some information with you guys. Please note that I'm not taking a stance either way, because what's going on in the gulf right now is atrocious. I really hope we never have to see another accident like this again.

That is all. <div>
</div><div>Edited for horrible grammar.</div>

 

[missouridawg]

I work for a oil field services company and we do millions of bucks with BP each year. I've personally worked on engineering projects that have been deployed on BPs Thunderhorse development.

For those that are interested to know, BP had 2 barriers downhole to prevent (redundancy is prevalent in the oil field) that both failed. My company actually quoted for those pieces of a equipment and we were not awarded the work due to pricing issues (we were too high). So these cement retainers that you guys might've heard of... both of them failed. Another thing not mentioned prevalently is that a seal assembly on a running tool that was supposed to be left down hole to provide a third barrier was inadvertantly pulled out of the hole, because of tool failure (3 times now).

Also, every offshore rig has SCSSV (surface controlled subsurface safety valves). These valves are controlled from surface and are rated up to 25,000 PSI in some instances. If you find a well that is producing at 10,000 PSI, you'll be making tons of a money. Anyways, these valves are used in emergency situations, such as this one. Unfortunately, when you have a major explosion at the wellhead, the control lines used to function the valves are no longer functioning. Now you've basically got a live well, producing from high pressure (downhole in the reservior) to low pressure (gulf of mexico).

Currently, there isn't technology out there that can really shut off a well such as this. This catastrophe is 100% unheard of in the oil field and planning for it would cost billions upon billions of dollars. If all the Gulf of Mexico oil producers were to invest, research, and implement such safety mechanisms, the end user (everyone that uses oil/gasoline as a product) would experience astronomical price increases at the pump and everywhere else (because most goods have to be delivered by a gasoline/diesel powered vehicle).

I saw that this was a hot topic and thought I'd share some information with you guys. Please note that I'm not taking a stance either way, because what's going on in the gulf right now is atrocious. I really hope we never have to see another accident like this again.

That is all. <div>
</div><div>Edited for horrible grammar.</div>

 

[missouridawg]

I work for a oil field services company and we do millions of bucks with BP each year. I've personally worked on engineering projects that have been deployed on BPs Thunderhorse development.

For those that are interested to know, BP had 2 barriers downhole to prevent (redundancy is prevalent in the oil field) that both failed. My company actually quoted for those pieces of a equipment and we were not awarded the work due to pricing issues (we were too high). So these cement retainers that you guys might've heard of... both of them failed. Another thing not mentioned prevalently is that a seal assembly on a running tool that was supposed to be left down hole to provide a third barrier was inadvertantly pulled out of the hole, because of tool failure (3 times now).

Also, every offshore rig has SCSSV (surface controlled subsurface safety valves). These valves are controlled from surface and are rated up to 25,000 PSI in some instances. If you find a well that is producing at 10,000 PSI, you'll be making tons of a money. Anyways, these valves are used in emergency situations, such as this one. Unfortunately, when you have a major explosion at the wellhead, the control lines used to function the valves are no longer functioning. Now you've basically got a live well, producing from high pressure (downhole in the reservior) to low pressure (gulf of mexico).

Currently, there isn't technology out there that can really shut off a well such as this. This catastrophe is 100% unheard of in the oil field and planning for it would cost billions upon billions of dollars. If all the Gulf of Mexico oil producers were to invest, research, and implement such safety mechanisms, the end user (everyone that uses oil/gasoline as a product) would experience astronomical price increases at the pump and everywhere else (because most goods have to be delivered by a gasoline/diesel powered vehicle).

I saw that this was a hot topic and thought I'd share some information with you guys. Please note that I'm not taking a stance either way, because what's going on in the gulf right now is atrocious. I really hope we never have to see another accident like this again.

That is all. <div>
</div><div>Edited for horrible grammar.</div>

 

[missouridawg]

I work for a oil field services company and we do millions of bucks with BP each year. I've personally worked on engineering projects that have been deployed on BPs Thunderhorse development.

For those that are interested to know, BP had 2 barriers downhole to prevent (redundancy is prevalent in the oil field) that both failed. My company actually quoted for those pieces of a equipment and we were not awarded the work due to pricing issues (we were too high). So these cement retainers that you guys might've heard of... both of them failed. Another thing not mentioned prevalently is that a seal assembly on a running tool that was supposed to be left down hole to provide a third barrier was inadvertantly pulled out of the hole, because of tool failure (3 times now).

Also, every offshore rig has SCSSV (surface controlled subsurface safety valves). These valves are controlled from surface and are rated up to 25,000 PSI in some instances. If you find a well that is producing at 10,000 PSI, you'll be making tons of a money. Anyways, these valves are used in emergency situations, such as this one. Unfortunately, when you have a major explosion at the wellhead, the control lines used to function the valves are no longer functioning. Now you've basically got a live well, producing from high pressure (downhole in the reservior) to low pressure (gulf of mexico).

Currently, there isn't technology out there that can really shut off a well such as this. This catastrophe is 100% unheard of in the oil field and planning for it would cost billions upon billions of dollars. If all the Gulf of Mexico oil producers were to invest, research, and implement such safety mechanisms, the end user (everyone that uses oil/gasoline as a product) would experience astronomical price increases at the pump and everywhere else (because most goods have to be delivered by a gasoline/diesel powered vehicle).

I saw that this was a hot topic and thought I'd share some information with you guys. Please note that I'm not taking a stance either way, because what's going on in the gulf right now is atrocious. I really hope we never have to see another accident like this again.

That is all. <div>
</div><div>Edited for horrible grammar.</div>

 

[Optimus Prime 4]

on the planning for the disaster, would have been cheaper in the long run... But these are risks you take when you do stuff like they do. With your knowledge, would a remote shutoff thing have possibly helped this earlier? Though I think I'm pissed they didn't have one regardless of whether it would have helped, because they should have the damn thing anyway. Just because congress decided not to require them doesn't mean they shouldn't still have them. You are allowed to do more than the minimum.

I was totally for drilling near shore before this happened, and now I'm really not sure. "Unprecedented" events do happen, so no matter how safe they tell us this drilling is things like this can happen. There will have to be a lot of changes before I can get back on board. New safety measures, maybe even having a big fleet of cleanup vessels cruising around at all times, ready to help contain any spill.

 

[drunkernhelldawg]

ssd

 

[missouridawg]

was not connected to the rig, yes it would probably work. Most of the fire burning is in the water and above the surface. The safety valves that are used are deployed below the mudline (bottom of the gulf).<div>
</div><div>So if you've got a device below the fire/devastation and its control line is diverted away from the rig on the ocean floor... then yes, it probably would work and could shut off the well.</div>

 

[Optimus Prime 4]

how it's just getting worse and worse because the oil has sand in it or something so it's just eroding the pipes more and more and that's why it's getting worse. I never would have thought that. What about this device they may place over it to capture the oil so it can be pumped out? Some sort of cap or something, but would take a couple month to get in place I think. How does that work?

Good info.

 

[missouridawg]

First, regarding the sand in the oil. Something that a lot of people not in the industry don't really get to see, is that when you have a producing well, you produce TONS of other stuff, besides oil and gas. Most wells produce 3 parts water and 1 part oil/gas. So if I've got a well that produced 50,000 bbls last week... I also produced 150,000 bbls of un-usuable/contaminated water that has to be stored in a "salt-water injection well". These wells are dug into old reservoirs and basically what you're doing, is replacing the produced oil/gas with the contaminated salt-water. It doesn't affect the environment in any way, because underneath the earth's surface, this water is prevalent everywhere. Also produced is lots of sand/salts etc...<div>
</div><div>Second, regarding the device to lower over the well and capture the oil... I honestly don't know too much about this, but from what I take, it's basically like placing an inverted funnel over the producing well. Oils specific gravity is lower than water, meaning that the oil will float to the surface of the water. So if place this upside down funnel over the producing well, in theory, I could see this working. However, at 5000' of water, the hydrostatic pressure on ANYTHING down there will be tremendous... and this doesn't even take into account the effects of the currents (which are amazingly strong). In theory, I could see this working... but it's going to take weeks and weeks of testing/design to get a workable product in the water.</div>

 

[missouridawg]

If you do reply to this, please do not make it political. This thread may get locked due to its non-sports nature... but we may be lucky enough to share information through it if we do not throw stones.<div>
</div><div>If it does get locked and you have any questions about the situation, feel free to PM... I'll gladly talk about what I know.</div>

 

[Optimus Prime 4]

the containment device too, like a big funnel or some sort of balloon type thing leading to pipes I guess. I was really wondering that if such a thing does work, could they have one made and ready for deployment as a safety measure. I bet they could come up with something. They need to have more measures in place in the future, to either prevent this type thing or at least be able to mitigate it when it does happen. And this really is not a political issue, I can't imagine anyone on either side wanting this to happen, or especially happen again.

Hell, I watched like a two hour documentary on that one huge offshore rig that Shell had built, the biggest ever. Cool stuff.

 

[ScoobaDawg]

from all the stories I have been reading on the subject they expect the cap to take 2 weeks to manufacture.
The industry has used this type of procedure in the gulf before, after Katrina hit, but NEVER for something this large and NEVER at such depths..
so it is a very untested solution. But it HAS TO WORK.. as they are just preparing to begin to drill a relief well that will take around THREE MONTHS to be ready to try and plug the other one.

Thanks for the industry info.. It's an interesting subject that is going to effect the whole nation and is a horrible disaster.
But I find the BOP info very interesting..

 

[Optimus Prime 4]

they be made in advance so they'd be ready? I don't really know, maybe it has to be designed knowing exactly where the hole will be or something. I also read that even with the three month relief well time frame that may not work, it's a possibility it won't.

 

[brantleyjones]

...however, probably almost all wrong.

To begin with SCSSV stands for "Surface Controlled Subsurface Safety Valve" and they are run as part of the production tubing string. According to reports, the rig had just finished running and cementing production casing, therefore there would have been no tubing in the hole, and thus no SCSSV. The way to shut the well in, if the crew noticed that it was flowing, would have been the BOP (blow out preventer) stack, which sits on the sea floor, but is controlled from the rig. There are multiple sets of preventers in the stack to close, and, yes, there is redundancy in the surface to seafloor control system. The fact that the BOP's seem to have failed, either before or after the rig sunk, is incredible, and, obviously, disasterous.

Secondly, if they'd just run and cemented production casing, why would they have been running cement retainers? To temporarily abandon the well? Normally, the next step would have been to test it. So your competitor's (Halliburton's) equipment failed, nice. Who do you work for, Baker?

 

[mjh94]

it could take 3 months or so to cap and stop the oil? this is good stuff missouridawg, keep it coming

 

[saltybulldog]

I have seen the illustrations showing that they plan to setup near the failed well head, drill beside and, I guess, intercept the line to divert the flow into the relief well. Is there not a method, using the same technology, to cap the well at a shallower depth?

Obviously, if there where they would be doing this, but I dont see how a method for capping the well doesnt exist. This really is tragic.

I was about to pull the trigger on a boat this month, but I will be waiting awhile...good thing I didnt buy the damn thing last week.

 

[brantleyjones]

most producing wells are produced at low enough rates to not produce sand, or "gravel packed" to prevent them from producing sand. They do produce some anyway, but if they produced tons, the well would sand up and not produce any more. What happens in a blowout is the the well is producing uncontrolled up the casing (which is just bigger pipe than "tubing"), and the whole earth (well, at least the producing formation) just comes in with the oil, although I'm not sure where you got your 3 parts water to 1 part oil number. In shallow gas blowouts the sand is what you count on to stop the blow out. If the sand falls back in the casing, it will "bridge off" and stop the flow. Unfortunately, oil is much more viscous (and this is reported as being a very viscous oil), and it carries sand better, thus much less fallback.

The sand blasts all the metal away, thus decreasing whatever resistance to flow there is. It is, therefore possible that the well was only producing 1000 bpd, as BP once reported, was then producing 5,000 bpd, and now may be producing 50,000 bpd. If that is the case, BP is losing billions of dollars in future production, not counting the clean up and litigation costs, and the Gulf Coast is facing disaster.

The device will be most likely be a giant version of the "pollution domes" used in the Katrina clean up, and will indeed be an inverted funnel, shaped like a pyramid with the top chopped off. Then they've got to have some sort of (big) conduit to surface, and they've got to have a way to do something with the oil once they get it there. This will be interesting to watch.

 

[FlabLoser]

What follows could be a good idea, could be a disastrous idea.

How about we put explosives near the well head just blow it up. The hope would be to blow the pipes and hope the hole collapses on itself and seals the hole. If it doesn't work...guess the problem just got a lot worse.

Just throwing that out there.

 

[KurtRambis4]

*

 

[KennyB]

not have a deadman system, and if it did, why was it not armed?

Also, the make ball valves large enough that could be activated by the ROV, why not have one located directly above the BOP?

 

[brantleyjones]

The relief well will try to intersect the current well in, or near, the producing formation and they will try to kill it by pumping mud and/or cement into the well to shut off the flow. Drilling back to nearly 18,000' is what will take 3 months.

The problem is the 5,000' of water. If it was onshore, they'd have Wild Well Control out there (and probably do) and they'd pull the riser off (the pipe from the BOP stack back to the rig) and set something down on top of it and shut it off. They can't even get divers down there, thus all the talk of ROV's (remotely operated vehicles - submarines).

You do what you know how to do, and what you anticipate. There hasn't been a spill of this magnitude connected with drilling operations in US waters since 1969. The focus, in the federal regulations and industry practice, has been on preventing the blowout. Worked pretty well for 41 years.

About the stuff being written about BP's Exploration and Production Plan stressing how unlikely a blowout was, duh! Statistically they were right. I have no isdea how many offshore wells have been successfully drilled since 1969, but it's a lot. And, the EDP is only one pile of paperwork that BP would have had to submit to the feds. Another one would have been their Oil Spill Contingency Plan, which would have been approved by both the MMS and the USCG. BP is part of a consortium of oil companies (it used to be Clean Gulf Inc.) that owns boats, booms, skimmers, vaccums, etc. for handling just this sort of occurence. Where do you think all of that stuff came from? (The Navy is now kicking some in.) The problem is that it doesn't work in rough weather, and it's never actually been used on a spill this big, in a body of water this big. Santa Barbara Channel (1969) and Prine William Sound are small, protected bays.

 

[brantleyjones]

Production hand (?) vs driller. Service company hand vs operator (or former operator).

Actually I have no idea what's going on. You certainly won't find out by reading anything on the net. Reporters have no idea how to interpret what they're being told, and I have a real hard time interpreting whatever it is that they think they're trying to tell us.

I do, however, have a pretty good idea of what can't be going on.

 

[brantleyjones]

you mean something that fail safes closed? That's how the SCSSV's in producing wells work. A drilling well isn't supposed to flow, and there are all kinds of barriers in place to prevent that flow from happening (BP's standard is that there have to be 2 mechanical barriers in place at all times.) This particular well (from what I read) had drilling mud of sufficient density to control the well, steel casing, cement, and in case of last resort, the BOP stack, which has multiple redundancies built into its barriers and its control system.

Obviously it flowed anyway. Something, or likely several somethings, had to have gone horribly wrong. We may know once the feds investigate and all the lawsuits take place, what it was. Maybe not. The crew on the rig floor at the time it happened are apparently all missing. Historically, blowouts occur because no one notices that the well is flowing until it's too late. Being late also increased the chance of equipment failure, because you put the equipment under much more adverse conditions.

I don't know what size BOP that rig had on it. 18-5/8" internal diameter? That's a pretty damned big ball valve. I doubt an ROV could operate it. And all the different rams and annular preventers that make up a BOP stack have been sufficient for 41 years, probably no one saw the need to add another heavy, bulky, expensive devise that could also have failed. Ball valves leak all the time.

 

[KennyB]

No, by deadman I mean the following:

<font face="Times New Roman"><p align="left"></p>

<font face="Times New Roman"><font face="Times New Roman"><p align="left">A fully automatic control system that, when armed, will operate specified BOP</p><p align="left">stack functions in the event of a </p></font><font face="Times New Roman">catastrophic failure that includes total loss of
<p align="left">signal communication and hydraulic supply from the surface. </p></font></font><font face="Times New Roman">The most
<p align="left">common failure mode that is the basis for this actuation is complete parting of</p><p align="left">the riser string. Typically, this sequence operates only the blind shear rams and</p><p align="left">its locking system. If equipped, a casing shear ram function may be initiated</p><p align="left">first depending on current rig operations. </p></font><font face="Times New Roman">This is a stand-alone system </font>

</font><font face="Times New Roman">that

does not share any components with the primary control system.</p></font><font face="Times New Roman">

</p></font><p align="left"><font face="Times New Roman">
Some rigs have them, some don't. The ones that do typically do not arm them to to the fact they cause neusance trips.

As far as a ball valve, they are made in that size and do not need Hydraulic Pressure to operate. The reason the ROV can not activate the BOP is because they can not create the hydralic pressure necessary to activate it at flow. The ROV's are only rated to generate hydraulic pressure sufficient to activate the BOP under a no flow condition.

One thing is for certain, this even will change the way oil production is done in the Gulf of Mexico.</font></p>

 

[brantleyjones]

watching the movie where John Wayne plays Red Adair? They actually do use explosives above the wellhead to put out gas wells that are on fire. Then they put a new BOP on above the wellhead to shut off the flow. Onshore.

Actually, it's probably better to leave all that steel from the wellhead down in place. It at least keeps the flow localized.

With those flowrates, it's not likely to fall back in on itself anyway, and even if it did, the formations near the seafloor are VERY soft and fragile - low compressive strength. The oil would just find another place to come to the seafloor elsewhere. That's what happened in Santa Barbara in '69 (under totally different conditions).

If they have to go the relief well route, it may not make a lot of difference, but it wouldn't really help.

 

[KennyB]

The crew on the rig floor at the time it happened are apparently all missing. Historically, blowouts occur because no one notices that the well is flowing until it's too late. Being late also increased the chance of equipment failure, because you put the equipment under much more adverse conditions.

I am also curious about this.All pieces of equipment are required by the MMS to be tested at the Wellbore pressure plus 50%. Again, I think someone royally screwed up and we are not being told about it. I hope that a full detailed report will be released about the incident.

 

[brantleyjones]

cool. Info I didn't have. I've never worked on/with a semi that had one, but I haven't done a lot of semi work. I was wondering what the problem with the ROV's was. I thought they were trying to function the system by activating the accumulator on the seafloor. I wouldn't think that an ROV would have the necessary volume of hydraulic fluid to function anything in the stack.

So the ball valve would have to be closed mechanically, like a TIW? That's what I was thinking of when I said that I didn't think an ROV could do it, and back pressure (under flow) would just make it worse.

And, yeah, or at least how wells are drilled. I knew the entire industry was in deep **** the first day. It's only gotten worse.

How could they not have gotten the well shut in before they evacuated?

 

[KennyB]

How could they not have gotten the well shut in before they evacuated?

That is the million dollar question Brantley.

<font face="Times New Roman"><p align="left"></p>

<p align="left">While the sealing mechanism and cutting blades are more robust in some preventers than in others, it is considered highly unlikely that any preventer currently</p><p align="left">available would stand up to this punishment during an uncontrolled flow of wellbore fluid. However, no tests have been conducted to verify this.</p>

This is being tested now, and is a obvious fail.

I have heard the Accumulator's on the seafloor failed during the blowout. No one has gotten a good handle on how to size the accumlators due to the fact that Boyle's Law is not really accurate on the sea floor. They are using correction factors but who knows if they are any good.</font>

 

[thatsbaseball]

nm

 

[brantleyjones]

and function tested tourly (every 12 hours).

Inconceivable, unless it was equipment failure, which is possible, but hard to imagine.

Actually there's a huge hint out there. One of the early articles said that the MMS was going to regulate human error out of the system. (Good luck with that.) This was before the search was over, the leak was re-discovered, and the ROV's failed to close, whatever. (Blind shears would have done it.)

Other than the BOP's failing, they've got to have missed it. (again, how?) Once it got into the riser, they were f'd. There is at least one remote control panel, if they couldn't shut it at the rig floor. They still should have shut it in before they evacuated, unless the explosion screwed all the controls.

If they can figure it out, we'll hear all about it, and we'll probably invite the Norwegians over to completely revamp our well control regulations. I can see BP ceasing E&P operations in the states over this.

 

[KennyB]

NM</p>

 

[missouridawg]

SCSSV stands for surface controlled subsurface safety valve. I'm not sure why I blanked out and put self contained. I was thinking along scuba lines for some reason.<div>
</div><div>It's really un-important who I work for. Yes... a competitor of Halliburton's... but I'm not in any way, shape, or form trying to place blame on them. A lot of sequential events occurred down hole to make this happen and it cannot all be blamed on one thing.</div>

 

[brantleyjones]

The accumulators failing would explain a lot. If so, you're pretty much f'd from that point on.

No, rubber and steel don't hold up to sand and oil very well. The idea is to shut the well in before the formation fluids get to the BOP.

And, ah! Didn't think about that on my one deepwater dry hole.

I knew I was never going to get anywhere getting my info from Yahoo. I know lots of people that work for BP and Transocean, but they're not going to tell me what's going on, even if I ask, and if they did, I wouldn't put it on the internet. It's pretty hard to follow from Auburn, AL.

 

[missouridawg]

<font class="Apple-style-span" face="Tahoma, Verdana, sans-serif" size="3"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-size: 12px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 2px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 2px;">I had lunch with our BP account manager this week and the information I passed along is what I heard from him. Whether any of it is true or not... who knows. I wasn't out there so I can't state any of this as fact.</span></font>

 

[KennyB]

100,000,000 Barrels is what BP estimated, they were planning a press release before the blow out happened.

KennyB
www.fishingmgc.net

 

[Optimus Prime 4]

and the same for anything else. Instead of one redundant device, have multiple. I know it's totally a different situation, but the idea is sort of similar.... in our datacenters, we have 3X redundancy now for all power, chilling, etc. instead of the standard N+1. We test our generators regularly, yet it's happened more than once that when the power went down they didn't start up, and then neither did their backups. Even after being tested regularly. So we now keep two backups for our backup systems.

You really can't be too careful.

 

[brantleyjones]

a dcent field (Giant). BP would be pissed without all the lawsuits, fines, bad press etc.

I had typed up a big reply to the first thread on this about how it was not in BP's financial interest to cut corners cost wise on a project like this ($700MM rig, lost reserves, lawsuits, fines, etc.) I didn't even go into BP's safety culture. The thread got locked before I could post it.

 

[KennyB]

The way the oil company looks at it optimus is that this extra equipment can create false readings and close improperlly, this causes considerable down time for the oil companies. That's why the rigs who do have deadmans, they typically aren't armed anyway. It's all about the might dollar. Looks like they are going to pay for that now.

 

[KennyB]

Brantely,

Why can't the drill the relief well shallower and tie into it at a much shallower depth? This would create a lot shorter route for the relief well, which could take a shorter period of time. By drilling it how they are drilling it now, are they trying to save the well? Are they being greedy?
</p>
KennyB
www.fishingmgc.net

 

[brantleyjones]

I'm totally out of the loop, and nothing like this has happened in my 30+ years in the oilfield. I'm not going to call any of my BP contacts (I'm an ex-ARCO hand) and ask them what happened, because I know they're not supposed to tell me, and I couldn't put it on the internet if they did. So, I'm trying to de-cipher Yahoo and figure out what happened. That has me so pissed off I can't see straight. Stupid f'ing "journalists" don't understand anything they're being told, can't repeat it right, and then have to speculate, or at least try to put it in layman's terms, and they seldom ever get that right. Every now and then they'll surprise me for awhile, then they wander off into "capping the well by a procedure known as cementing".

As far as I can tell, Al Qaeda sunk the rig using an old Nazi submarine, which BP said was unlikely to happen in their Exploration and Development Plan, and they should therefore be hung drawn and quartered.