Wow ....what shocks me is that these things were put out there in the ocean floor ... And no one every thought about how to remove it later ...that's amazing and quite ignorant ... How can anyone cause such destruction with any thought of the outcome ....I am astounded ...
That's how the world works, they never thought about the idea that oil would slow down in these areas. What do you think that Henry Ford made first? Junkyards or cars? Automotive recycling was 2nd, I promise you that.
Honestly there isn't much practical thing to be achieved by this whole decommissioning process. Even removing the topsides were pretty much unnecessary, only served an asthetic purpose. This is not oil sands mining that you must have a robust plan to return a very large area of land to it's former natural state. It's just a bunch of oil rigs sitting on an almost dry oil reservior. This whole operation is really a homage to environmental laws and an unnecessary one since it actually achieves nothing. They might as well have left the whole of it untouched.
If the structure was left in place it will eventually collapse and rupture? But it probably last a few hundred years left in its position? the oil has no pressure left the oil has been extracted it would not be difficult to cap so there is no danger to the environment, please leave it in place and turn it into a hotel
I can understand how the weight of the concrete legs would make cutting the legs very difficult, but surely a robot could drill holes through the legs until the structure crumbles.
Just decorate the top of the concrete towers with big red dinosaurs or lollipops that light up. If a boat hits a concrete tower, that's sad. If a boat hits a 50 foot tall flashing lollipop in the middle of the sea, then that's bad piloting.
I thought you would end ...then that's hilarious! I vote for dinosaurs, since the pillars were built for drilling for liquified dinosaurs, and they symbolise a technology that is just as obsolete.
At this point cutting the concrete is not an option. The entire platform was constructed for the purpose of getting oil from the ocean. Now that the platform has been decommissioned, the topside has been recycled. Removing the entire platform in which your company installed is the right thing to do. Take responsibility for your work and remove it all. Money is not the issue since the company has made billions.
When technology is opposed to common sense! I do not understand why they do not install a temporary deck to solve the problems of cells, comuns, with pumping and wireline. With the possibility of scrapping a large part of the debris (cutting) and others. A much more economical solution for part of the work. Once the deck is laid, you can work in any season. The bridge could be adaptable to other platforms. The temporary bridge could accommodate a light rig so that it could drill on the cells to clarify the solution oils and solids. Have on site the structure of work, laboratory eg. Wireline/Slickline and coiled tubing on deck. This solution seems much safer and more economical than underwater interventions. Since years we perform top sediments and bottom hole sampling in wells and for myself I never use radar, sonar, camera un other gadgets. I was a member of engineering team for ballasting of Brent "C" and now Specialist for heavy fishing on oil and gas wells using Wireline coil tubing and others.
You have rocket, prepare, launch, Lol either take it or leave it You have structures, Built already. Little ajustment on everything anything You have the count down " don't you' Every body watching the launch
This video is quite entertaining...(18) minutes of excuses why Shell needs to leave everything except the valuable bits right where they are...funny how that works. The get to claim approx. $14B in back taxes and spend millions figuring out how to put billions in their pockets...it's all just a big game.
Shell overdid things for the Environment and for DECC guidelines. They might as well have left everything as it was, what would have been the environmental impact exactly? Could have saved some of the taxpayer's money as well as their own money.
