New Uses of Existing Technology for Controlling Blowouts: Chronology of a Blowout Offshore Louisiana

Abstract

This paper describes new uses of existing technology for controlling a blowout in Well 3 of the West Cameron 165 Field offshore Louisiana. New methods were used for the Quartz Pressure System and side-scan sonar equipment to determine if the blowout well was flowing underground or underwater. Also, the Magnetic Gradient Ranging System determined the distance and direction from the relief well to the blowout well. Introduction West Cameron Block 165 is located 32 miles southwest of Cameron, LA, in 48 ft of water. The field was developed using six single-well platform installations. All six wells were completed in the only productive sand in the field, the K-2 sand. Before blowing out, Well 3 was the best producer in the field with flow rates of 13 MMcf/D, 90 bbl condensate/D, and with a flowing tubing pressure of 2,900 psig. Well 3 was drilled essentially as a straight hole in Nov. 1969 and completed in the K-2 sand with subsea perforations at 9,620 to 9,626 ft and 9,638 to 9,657 ft.On March 23, 1976. all six single-well platform installations in the field were shut in manually to install new production equipment on Platform 1, the central production equipment on Platform 1, the central gathering platform for this field. At 7:00 a.m. on March 24, 1976, gas was discovered escaping from around the bradenhead flange of West Cameron 165 Well 3. Initial inspection of the area indicated that the flow was occurring primarily from the bradenhead flange; however, gas bubbles also were seen around the legs of the platform. In 2 hours, the bradenhead bolts were cut by the gas flow and the Christmas tree was blown off the bradenhead flange. Well 3 was out of control and blowing gas, mud, and sand.When notified of the problem on the morning of March 24, 1976, Tenneco Oil Co. assembled its Spill Contingency Task Force. Since the structure of the Spill Contingency Task Force was organized in advance, this work force began planning strategy for bringing the well under control. Before the end of the day, the following events occurred.1. A representative with a blowout control company inspected the situation and made recommendations.2. Tenneco decided to drill a relief well.3. A drilling rig was obtained for drilling the relief well and was being towed to the location.4. A pollution control unit was on location to contain any possible pollutants.5. Two barges equipped with water-spraying facilities were placed under contract. and by mid-afternoon, one barge arrived on location and began spraying water to prevent ignition. prevent ignition. 6. All pertinent state and federal agencies were notified.Subsequently, the Spill Contingency Task Force became known as the blowout team. The blowout team met at least once a day to make recommendations, coordinate planning, and oversee the execution of various blowout planning, and oversee the execution of various blowout operations. On May 9, 1976, just 47 days after the blowout occurred, the dedicated work of this task force and many people in the industry culminated in the successful control of Well 3.This paper combines two older papers .1, 2 Its main emphasis is directed toward the reservoir evaluation of a blowout. Using the computer and other special tools for monitoring a blowout during control operations is discussed. JPT P. 1473

Flow rate and total discharge estimations in gas-well blowouts

“…Among other, Lehner and Williamson (1974), Warriner and Cassity (1988), and Kouba et al (1993) have explored theoretical analysis of controlling blowout through relief wells by water injection. Lewis (1978) reported successful control of blowout for the West Cameron field. Earlier, Hasan et al (2000) probed this coupled nature of the problem for gas/oil flow.…”