Meanwhiletheproblemofjustintimedeliveryofwellplanswhic

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: t collar across a hydrocarbon‐bearing zone of interest in the Macondo well, instead of at the bottom of the shoe. If the float collar had been at the bottom of the shoe, the cement job would likely have been more overbalanced (i.e., greater pressure from the cement relative to the pressures from the well). This increased overbalance would likely have allowed the rig crew more time to recognize that hydrocarbons were flowing in the well and more opportunities to take measures to control the well. BP’s decision to set 69 the float collar across the hydrocarbon‐bearing zones of interest, instead of at the bottom of the shoe, was a contributing cause of the blowout. The Panel found no evidence suggesting that BP shared with the Deepwater Horizon rig crew or Transocean shore‐based personnel any of the information available to BP regarding specific risks associated with the Macondo production casing cement job – including the decisions noted above that the Panel determined were causes or contributing causes to the blowout. BP’s failure to inform the parties operating on its behalf...
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online