Visit MODERN CASTING’s Late-Breaking Metalcasting News at
www.moderncasting.com
INDUSTRY NEWS
Letterbox The Deepwater Horizon well blowout was a tragic loss
Could Metalcasting Technology Haved Stopped the Oil Leak in the Gulf Months Ago?
of life caused by carelessness and greed. But the continu- ing tragedy is the incompetent handling of the problem after the disaster. Three months ago, before BP began the Top Kill pro-
cess of using drilling mud to plug the leak, Chesapeake Specialty Products Inc., Baltimore, Md., and myself (Don Sanchez, company CEO) advised that we had a better solution and predicted failure using the drilling mud. Chesapeake advised the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), BP and government officials of the need for heavier media because drilling mud lacks the necessary specific gravity. Well, surprise, surprise, it failed. BP and our government had the potential to stop the leak
within one week of the blowout but neither would listen to those that could help. The “BP experts” were not set up to receive or consider common sense solutions to stopping the leak. The process of submitting suggestions through the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to BP was nothing more than a public relations sham. The Top Kill plugging procedure easily could have been successful. The dynamics of the well are all about terminal velocity and pressure. Terminal velocity tells us how fast an object will fall through a gas or liquid. Pressure tells us the lifting force generated by the well. The top of the well (well head) is 36 in. in diameter, and
the bottom of the well (13,000 ft. below the sea floor) is 7 in. in diameter. This, along with flow rates, is critical in mak- ing terminal velocity calculations—the smaller the diameter, the more rapid the flow rate. The flow rate is 26 times faster at the bottom of the well than the top of the well. Doing some conversions and simple math, assuming a flow rate of 100,000 barrels per day, the flow rate is 0.6 mph at the well head and 15 mph at the base. That flow rate is too fast for drilling mud with a specific gravity of 2 to penetrate, but not for iron or steel balls or granulated iron and steel with a specific gravity of 7. Almost three full months before the well was success-
fully capped and some 2-8 million barrels of oil ago, using all appropriate channels and anyone who would listen, Chesapeake Specialty Products proposed as a solution to feed 4,000 tons of large and small cast iron and steel particles mixed with a Pepset-type binder system into the well. This 4,000 tons was enough material to fill the entire well from top to bottom. The timed release catalyst would setup hard, creating a solid pipe throughout the well. The concept was tested and proven that the binder would solidify in and underwater. After almost three solid months of repeated demands for a response, we were finally told by USCG and BP that our concept was rejected. Neither provided any reason for the rejection
MODERN CASTING / August 2010 13
in their notice. Our subsequent demands for informa- tion as to why revealed the rejection was “the well may not withstand the pressure.” But our proposal, just like Top Kill, was all about plugging the inside of the well. Either they did not understand or they did not review the document in detail. This is an example of big business and big government
at their worst. How many people have we run into that are not receptive to new ideas? Is it true that Americans are no longer innovators? Are you, as a metalcasting man- ager/owner, open to new ideas and new products? There is plenty of opportunity out there for people willing to learn and innovate. And we do not have to destroy the environment in the process.
DON SANCHEZ, CEO
CHESAPEAKE SPECIALTY PRODUCTS, INC. BALTIMORE
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60