No1stcostlist.com

Dan · Joined: Dec 31, 1969 Posts: 282 Location: USA

The intake end is grinding up from bottom, thus there is less oil to lift in well pipe above intake end. At 2 PSI an hour that works out to 508 lbs less oil and gas in pipe as the well length shortens by 15 inches plus per hour at the 7 inch inside diameter intake pipe end.

Why is 7" intake end shortening? The 65k plus field pressure causes the grit containing oil and gas to explosively decompress as they enter the intake grinding it up from bottom. As the intake end grinds up, it decreases the amount of oil and gas in pipe above intake, thereby reducing the weight being lifted, thus increasing pressure steadily.

Analysis premises: 1. increasing pressure means field pressure is a constant. There can be no field depletion unless field pressure is decreasing over time at well head. Ergo, any constantly increasing pressure implies no decrease in field pressure and that the field is very very big with respect to oil removed to date.

2. Why leaks? There is 6745 PSI measured at containment end where 9000 psi was expected = leak(s) would account for the difference. Seeps are now reported as of 7-18-10.

3. 65K + psi entering a 7" intake that opens up to 18" well head implies a reduction in pressure to 9000 psi at well head from 65k intake pressure = a reduction factor of 7.2 at well head. (Pi times radius squared gives surface area of circle. 3.5^ = 11.25 square inches and 18" well head = 9^ = 81 square inches = 7.2 reduction factor.) Thus with a 9k expected pressure at well head, then intake pressure must be 64.8K psi.)

a) Why? This is a hydraulic system, the field is the oil reservoir under pressure. This means closing off well head means pressure must rise to intake pressure = 65k psi throughout system unless there are LEAKS. In this case at least 50% of flow.
a) There are 254 square inches at well head times two = 508 cubic inches. 2" times 7.2 = 14.4" at 7' ID intake end.
b) The leak holes circumferences are also abrading = decrease in psi; thus grind up rate is > 14.2" per hour.

Conclusions:a) Lets assume 18" an hour = 36 feet per day,
b) Assume for only 50 days = 1800 feet up from original intake.

1. Relief wells could hear grind up coming. Probably high pitched.
2. There is an 'erosion cone' from original field roof up to cones tip at intake.
a) the vortex being sucked into intake is eroding cone walls increasing grind up rate.
3. No plug by relief wells before intake grinds up to them = no relief by them.
4. Removing cap increases grind up rate as back pressure decreases.

ToDos
1. Measure by sound how high intake has reached.
2. Prepare a bomb to be set off at 50' to 100' from well. The relief wells will do for setting bomb at right depth and distance from well.
3. Pray bomb works.

Some implications
1. Should this field reach the surface while holding its 65k pressure constant, it will unzip like the Yellowstone caldera putting huge amounts of oil and gas on surface of Gulf.
2. One lightening strike and there will be a very large firestorm that will last a long time. You can work out the other ramifications for yourself.
3. With success, BP and our governments who let BP be totally irresponsible must be held accountable. It is time to play the blame game.

Dan · Joined: Dec 31, 1969 Posts: 282 Location: USA

Posted to deepwaterhorizonresponse.com 7-19-10 at 12:10 PST.

Also posted at zerohedge, godlike productions, and The Oil Drum; therefore I feel my job of warning is adequate.

Since the 2 psi was reported on July 16 and there is an alternative method of disconnecting our conservation debt that is not as pleasant as dropping a spaceship down a 'wormhole' on July 16, 2012, I am not sure I should say more on this subject.

Lets pray the relief wells work.

As usual, no questions or replies.

Dan · Joined: Dec 31, 1969 Posts: 282 Location: USA

Prediction: Since intake tip is grinding up; then it should grind past lower relief well end shortly.

Result: 1. No diversion of pressure = no cementing well.
2. Very little time until intake tip grinds past bomb distance for both relief wells.

To do: Two small nukes simultaneously. Use one likely not be able to use other as 2nd well bore likely damaged by first blast.

Not do: We do not want to find out.

Dan · Joined: Dec 31, 1969 Posts: 282 Location: USA

Once I figured out well pressure, 85k plus but most likely 100k, then all I want is to be wrong.

Possible evidence of wrong:

No surface evidence from leak? That would be good news, but since the leak is smaller than original well exit volume and spread over some larger area of sea floor = coming out at much lower velocity and at much lower temperature, would we see it on surface this soon???

Ans: Probably not.

Dan · Joined: Dec 31, 1969 Posts: 282 Location: USA

7-28-10 Admiral Allen, "Allen also said that pressure in BP's Macondo well continues to climb slowly, a sign that the well remains intact.".

Dan · Joined: Dec 31, 1969 Posts: 282 Location: USA

For the pressure to change there must be movement somewhere.
Field pressure increase after millions of barrels have been removed. Not likely = grind up plus a leak.