BP Catastrophe Part XIV: Where did the oily sheen come from? Could the MASSIVE OIL PLUME from Deepwater Horizon be the culprit? Look at the maps. If so, this is only the beginning: expect many more such incidents in months to come.

• http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=11544098

Offshore Oil Platform Explodes in Gulf of Mexico, but No Leak Found

Sept. 2, 2010 —

An explosion on an offshore oil platform in the Gulf of Mexico early today ignited a fire that caused workers to evacuate into the water, but the U.S. Coast Guard said that all the workers survived and there are no oil leaks reported near the platform.
The cause of the explosion is not yet known, but the 13 workers who were photographed floating in the ocean waiting to be rescued have been accounted for. They were airlifted to Terrebone General Medical Center in Houma, La.
U.S. Coast Capt. Peter Troedsson said none of the workers had serious injuries and the fire has been extinguished.
"The fire is out, and there are no reports of visible sheen in the water," Troedsson said at a press conference this afternoon. "There are no reports of leaks, but we continue to investigate."
Earlier reports from the U.S. Coast Guard had suggested that an oily sheen was seen near the site, sparking fears of another oil spill like the BP's Deepwater Horizon Spill, just east of this explosion.
A press release from the Mariner Energy said an initial examination of the site revealed no leaking oil.
"In an initial flyover, no hydrocarbon spill was reported," read the release.
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal said at a press conference that Mariner Energy has told his office and the U.S. Coast Guard that the production platform was active at the time of the explosion, servicing as many as seven active wells. There are a total of 13 wells connected to the platform, said Jindal.
"They are saying that they've shut in the production platform," said Jindal. "If that's true that's a very important step but we haven't independently verified that."
Current production averages 1,400 barrels of oil a day, said Jindal, and 9.2. million cubic feet of natural gas. The maximum production of the platform is 1,800 barrels per day.
Jindal warned of the fast-changing information flow from these types of explosions, and said will not be confident that there is no sheen or that the fire is contained until it's independently verified.
Initial reports of the incident described the platform as being "completely engulfed in flames," according to Jindal. He said Mariner Energy believes one of the seven active wells connected to the platform caught fire, but that all seven are now shut down.
"What they suspect is burning is condensate or what is stored on this platform," Jindal said.
The fire is contained but still burning, according to the Coast Guard's Masaschi, who said that one of three firefighting vessels headed to the scene has already arrived.

The Coast Guard sent seven helicopters, two fixed-wing planes and a number of watercraft to the scene.
According to the Coast Guard, the platform was fixed in 340 feet of water. Workers have told authorities that they started emergency shutdown procedures before evacuating.
The platform does not have a standard blow-out preventer, a safety mechanism used to seal gas and oil wells, according to the Coast Guard.
Lee Hunt, the president of the International Association of Drilling Contractors, told ABCNews.com that this rig is different from Deepwater Horizon, which dumped millions of barrels of oil into the Gulf after exploding last spring, because it is not floating and is likely a "fixed, manned production platform."
"This platform doesn't have a drilling rig on it, it's essentially a small refinery that brings the oil up through a riser or pipe onto the deck of the platform," said Hunt. "Then the refinery equipment separates the oil from the gas and salt water. Pure oil never comes up."
A platform like the one where the explosion occurred is placed in position after a well is drilled and completed, said Hunt.
Hunt said he suspects the report of an oil sheen may be from oil already on the platform going through the refining process.
"My estimate would be that the sheen would be from some small quantities of oil being processed or even from the fuel tanks that may have been ruptured," he said. "There should not be any oil from the wellhead itself, this would be a surface spill."
White House spokesman Robert Gibbs addressed the rig explosion in his daily briefing saying, "We obviously have response assets ready for deployment, should we receive reports of pollution in the water."
It was not immediately known what caused the explosion on the rig, positioned 100 miles south of Vermillion Bay in Louisiana.
Phone messages left for Mariner Energy were not immediately returned, but the press release from the company commented on its production:
"During the last week of August 2010, production from this facility averaged approximately 9.2 million cubic feet of natural gas per day and 1,400 barrels of oil and condensate," said the release.
Bob Dye, a spokesman for Apache Corperation, which was in talks to merge with Mariner Energy earlier this year, would only say that they "don't operate the facility" where the explosion took place.

•  http://www.nola.com/news/index.ssf/2010/09/coast_guard_responding_to_rig.html  

( Which one is heavier, oil, or water? Would oil rise to 340 ft or higher from a depth of 1100 ft?

Has the Gulf of Mexico turned into one giant flammable gas station - "extinguish all cigarettes", etc?)

 

 

 

 Ongoing oil plume from the gushing Deepwater Horizon Well:

BP Catastrophe Part XIII: the underwater oil plume...

• And here, in yet more unpublicized details, the whole story, by an astute blogger: access the extensive information provided - no need for me to repeat it, the author is brilliant, and apparently a geologist to boot.

• Of course, don't forget to go back to all the posts about the BP catastrophe on ISRAEL TRUTH TIMES, starting June 11, 2010, by searching for the label "BP" on this blog, for the scoop.

http://www.newsvine.com/

• Which well are they "killing"?

Wed Sep 1, 2010 2:11 PM EDT

Some of the most critical details of the disastrous Deepwater Horizon (DWH) blowout on 20 April 2010 were never made public. We are told that only one well location was drilled when in fact BP drilled at 3 wells at 3 different seabed locations. In fact the 20 April blowout was the last of several serious near-misses and the blowout location was actually 714ft north of Well A location. Despite its importance, there were no public media reports of a second underground explosion 2 days after the initial blowout on 20 April 2010 burst into flames onboard the Deepwater Horizon.

Four and a half months is a very long time to permanently kill what was initially reported as a “small leak in a very big ocean”. We were first told that it would take 3 months to drill the two relief wells (C and D)? We were told that the Relief wells were the surest way to kill the wild gushing well. Well, mid-August had come and gone by without the promised permanent kill by the Relief wells.
Months had been spent discussing all the intricate details of killing the zombie well in so many ways, from Top Kill to Bottom Kill to Static Kill to Relief Kill that it was almost killing me instead of the zombie well. Has it occurred to them, the zombie Well A could not be killed because it was the wrong well?
What if the capped Well A was drilled only to slightly over 5000ft bml? It would easily explain why Well A could only be cemented to 5000ft. It could explain how 40% of the 500 barrels of cement went into the formation. It could explain why only 3000 ft of drilling rod was in the well and not 18,000ft. It could explain why Well A had to be abandoned on 13 Feb due to 3000ft of drilling rod reportedly jammed at the bottom of Well A. It could explain the mystery of BP's attempts to kill the zombie well that refused to lay dead.
See figure 114.1 on the depths of the 3 wells drilled in correct perspective.

http://bklim.newsvine.com/_news/2010/09/01/5024700-which-well-are-they-killing

• .... and somebody's comment on that blog:

"Is Well S20BC still leaking? In all probability - YES. Maybe gushing is a better word. Perhaps this could explain why we continue to have so much oil in the gulf despite capping Well A in mid July.
If killing Well A was so problematical, imagine killing an "open gushing" well. Perhaps that is why it is taking so long for the "sure kill" Relief Well to bottom kill S20BC."

• http://bklim.newsvine.com/_news/2010/07/30/4781973-why-is-bps-macondo-blowout-so-disastrous-beyond-patch-up- 

• http://bklim.newsvine.com/_news/2010/08/29/4994064-the-diagrammatic-illustration-that-says-it-all

-28 Aug 2010

The diagrammatic illustration that says it all.

Within 4 days of publishing this article, Why is-BP’s Macondo Blowout so disastrous and Beyond Patch-up with this diagrammatic illustration, visits to my column shot up by almost 20,000%.
This diagram which had been pasted all over the world had been ridiculed as total nonsense, comical, garbage and many other terms which I will not post here.
Please judge for yourself the accuracy of this qualitative model and the predictions that had since proven to be true with recent events.
The label “Well Location” intentionally left out the alphabet “A” as it was intended to be the well that was actually drilled which forensic analyses of the seabed debris determined to be 720 ft NNW of Well A. This mysterious “well that never was” (referred to as “S20BC”) is still being ignored publicly by the Authorities, BP and all those involved in the cover-up to continue duping the American public and world at large. This damaged S20BC well is the real gusher and the vertical conduit draining oil and gas out of the giant reservoir at 18,300 ft below mud line; not the bogus capped Well A.
Well A was drilled down to 5000 ft or thereof. It had to be abandoned on 13 Feb 2010 due to a broken drilling rod string which was jammed in the well. One must ask why a drill string of steel pipes could be jammed inside the well bore. Recently we hear BP admitting the possibility of formation collapse. And how could the formation collapse into the well bore without pressurized fluid forcing debris and jamming the drilling rods in the open section of the well?
So my independent geological model was right. Dr Bea was right. Matt Simmons was right. So did millions all over the world who did not fall for the Bogus Press releases and the blatant acts of Mass Deception.
Well A could not be the well that blew up on 20 April 2010. At 5000 ft bml, the bottom of Well A is still 13,000 ft above the reservoir. Well A was already leaking hydrocarbon migrating through the faults, GWSF zone and the pervious flanks of the Dome or whatever vertical structural deformities. Well B was drilled to 13,100 ft.
The mysterious “well that never was” (S20BC) reached the targeted reservoir at 18,300 ft bml. It was this well that blew on 20 April 2010. This well had to stay hidden to hide the many dark secrets of the Macondo well. Credit must be given to the determined few who against all odds and the myriad of half truths, distorted facts and Bogus Press information, persevered to bring to the world the truth.
Drilling at Well B and S20BC only made a precarious geological situation worse, by acting as vertical conduits to the shallower 176 ft thick gas-charged siltstone bed discovered by the Texaco Rigel Well in 1999 and BP’s targeted giant reservoir at 18,000 ft bml.
As long been suspected, Well A was deviously capped to mesmerize the world into a hypnotic trance, diverted from the real environmental disaster. A 5000 ft deep Well A would explain the many unexplainable inconsistencies and mysterious evidence that are surfacing now in killing the zombie well that refused to lay dead.
This geological illustration that says it all was independently created on 25 July 2010 based on limited publicly available information, thousands of miles from the crime scene. It explains the need for so many cover-ups. And if these cover-ups are any indication of BP’s misconduct, integrity and credibility, we should be worried about Another Deepwater Production Platform in the Gulf called Thunderhorse at Prospect 778/822.

Sun Aug 29, 2010 6:16 AM EDT

By BK Lim