Layer | Fill | Outline |
---|
Map layers
Theme | Visible | Selectable | Appearance | Zoom Range (now: 0) |
---|
Fill | Stroke |
---|---|
Collaborating Authors
Abstract Port Fourchon Junction is located within Chevron's Fourchon Terminal, just south of Port Fourchon and is operated by Shell Pipeline Company LP. This manifold metering station is a critical junction for the Mars Corridor oil, as oil production from Mars (MC-807), Ursa (MC-809), Titan (MC-941), Who Dat (MC-547), Medusa (MC-582), and Olympus (MC-807B) flows through this station via a 24" pipeline. Port Fourchon is at the edge of the Mississippi delta facing the sea, one of the world's most vulnerable low-elevation coastal zones. It is highly exposed to storm surge and wave-induced inundation under hurricanes which regularly visit the Gulf of Mexico. In addition, it experiences one of the largest rates of subsidence in the world, which combined with sea level rise, will increase the site vulnerability in the coming decades. This study assesses present and future scenarios of subsidence and sea level rise under extreme metocean conditions induced by hurricanes and their impact on Port Fourchon Junction. Local effects such as the differential settlement of the barrier beach have been also considered. Using results from the numerical model XBeach, a set of different present and future scenarios are modelled under extreme metocean conditions. These conditions and the subsequent design parameters calculated, are not obtained through traditional extreme value analysis methods, instead, they are estimated through the influence of boundary conditions forced with the corresponding return period values of the parameters. Boundary conditions for the simulations are extracted from Grand Isle and Port Fourchon sea level observations, and from FEMA and the Water Institute of the Gulf simulations. Port Fourchon site should be subject to flooding for 10-year return period conditions based on Grand Isle observations. For 5-6 years return period conditions some degree of milder partial flood should also be expected. This is well captured by the model. While the highest inundating level is mostly dependent on winds, waves and surge acting together, surge is the single most critical parameter that defines the asset's base inundation level. Design future conditions based on surge extreme from FEMA simulations are recommended over surge extremes derived from Grand Isle observations. The barrier beach and the breakwaters play a key factor in sheltering site from waves and surge. Even when submerged under extreme high return period conditions they dissipate the waves ensuring that the maximum water level (wave crest elevation) on site is lower than would otherwise be without them. It is then important to maintain them fit for purpose during the entire lifespan of the asset. Both Grand Isle and Port Fourchon subsidence scenarios yield similar results. Based on the importance of Port Fourchon Junction facilities, the design criteria obtained, and the higher subsidence level observed at Port Fourchon (compared to Grand Isle), it is recommended that a 1000-year return period and future scenario based on FEMA surge level and Port Fourchon Relative Sea Level Rise (RSLR) is adopted for design. The subsidence associated to this scenario is 9.8 mm/year. The sea level rise associated to this scenario is 2 mm/year.
- North America > United States > Louisiana (0.30)
- North America > United States > Mississippi (0.25)
- Government > Regional Government > North America Government > United States Government (1.00)
- Energy > Oil & Gas > Upstream (1.00)
- Reservoir Description and Dynamics > Reservoir Fluid Dynamics > Integration of geomechanics in models (1.00)
- Reservoir Description and Dynamics > Reservoir Characterization (1.00)
- Health, Safety, Environment & Sustainability > HSSE & Social Responsibility Management > Contingency planning and emergency response (1.00)
ABSTRACT: LOOP LLC's (Louisiana Offshore Oil Port) primary business interest is offloading foreign crude oil from tankers moored off the Louisiana coast through a 48-inch diameter, 45-mile long pipeline. Crude oils that enter the pipeline originate from all over the world and vary widely in temperature. In LOOP's control center, the pipeline controllers use a software model based leak detection system to monitor the pipeline operation. The model is based on the real time simulation of the flow coupled with a thermal model to simulate the heat transfer to and/or from the pipeline and the environment. The ground thermal model is a solution of the heat conduction equation in the ground around the pipeline. This paper discusses the thermal effects observed during implementation of a leak detection system on the LOOP pipeline, and how those effects were accounted for in order to maintain high levels of leak detection sensitivity. Introduction: The Louisiana Offshore Oil Port (LOOP LLC) offloads crude oil from supertankers, pumps it through a buried pipeline into underground storage in salt dome caverns, and delivers it to refineries throughout much of the southern and mid-western United States. LOOP's facilities consist of a Marine Terminal located in the Gulf of Mexico 18 miles off the coast of Southeastern Louisiana, a booster pump station located just inland near Port Fourchon, Louisiana, and the Clovelly Dome Storage Terminal located about 25 miles inland near Galliano, Louisiana. The Marine Terminal consists of two connected platforms in water 117 feet deep. This water depth allows VLCC (very large crude carrier) and ULCC (ultra large crude carrier) supertankers with up to 90 feet drafts to moor at one of three Marine Terminal single point moorings. Up to four 6600 horsepower pumps offload the crude oil into a 48-inch diameter pipeline that runs a total of 45 miles through the Fourchon Booster Station to the Clovelly Dome Storage Terminal. The offshore portion of the pipeline is covered in concrete and buried on the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico. The Fourchon Booster Station is located near mile 21 of the LOOP main oil line and provides up to four 6,000 horsepower booster pumps in series to boost pressure and flow rates to the Clovelly underground storage facility. The pipeline from the Fourchon Booster Station to Clovelly is about 24 miles long and is buried in marsh and soil. The Clovelly Dome Storage Terminal is the termination point of the LOOP main oil line. This facility also has four 6,000 horsepower pumps that can be used, if necessary, to inject the crude oil into one of 9 underground storage caverns. The caverns are filled with a combination of brine (saturated salt water) on the bottom and crude oil floating on top. The brine is displaced when injecting oil into the cavern. To overcome the static pressure of the brine and displace it, the pipeline must effectively pump oil "uphill" from a hydraulic standpoint.
- Transportation > Freight & Logistics Services > Shipping > Tanker (1.00)
- Energy > Oil & Gas > Upstream (1.00)
Abstract During the past 50 years, storage pits and adjacent land around the BayMarchand facility near Port Fourchon, Louisiana, had accumulated large depositsof non-hazardous drilling and production waste containing naturally occurringradioactive material (NORM). This material primarily included drill cuttings, drilling mud, produced sand, saltwater, pipe scale, crude oil and precipitates. To remediate this site, Chevron chose to re-inject the material into the deepsubsurface through on-site Slurry Fracture Injection (SFI). This processprovided greater environmental security than alternative surface pit orlandfill disposal, and at much lower cost than off-site transport and disposaloptions. More than 1 million barrels of pit soil and canal bottoms was safelydisposed into a single well during two years of injection concluding in March2000. Solid waste was mixed with water to create a slurry and injecteddown-hole above formation parting pressure into a weakly consolidated sandstoneformation at depths from 4400 to 5000 feet. Injection operations were episodic, generally taking place for 11 hours per day, 5 days per week. This allowedformation pressure to decline each day to initial reservoir pressure. Theproject was designed and extensively monitored to maintain and verifycontainment within the permitted interval. Down-hole pressure was continuouslymonitored, allowing analysis of daily fall-off pressure. Waste containment wasconfirmed through a combination of shut-in pressure analysis, periodicstep-rate tests, and periodic gamma logs and temperature surveys. In addition to improved environmental protection provided by thistechnology, the on-site operation was a fraction of off-site disposal costs toChevron. This paper describes the project design and permitting, injectionoperations, containment monitoring and analysis, and project economics. Introduction The Bay Marchand oil field is located just offshore of southern Louisiana. The field began production in 1949 and has been operated by Chevron for most ofits life. Oil production came onshore at the Bay Marchand Terminal in PortFourchon (Figure 1). Oil production was processed through a series of pits intothe 1980's to separate water and other materials from the oil. Over time thepits accumulated drill cuttings, drilling mud, produced sand, salt water, pipescale, crude oils and precipitates, all of which contained small amounts ofnaturally occurring radioactive material (NORM)1,2. The elements of concernwere uranium-238, thorium-234 and radium-228. The three processing pits were located at the east end of the CaliforniaCanal (Figure 2). These pits were hydraulically isolated, which prevented anyradioactive materials from leaching into the adjacent canal, particularlyradium which is very soluble in salt water. To the southeast the Dead End Canalalso contained substantial quantities of NORM and NOW (non-hazardous oilfieldwaste) mixed into canal bottom soils. This contamination was primarily due tooverflows from discharge and processing pits at the material handling facilitylocated adjacent to the canal. The remediation project was composed of two phases: excavate and backfillthe Bay Marchand pits, and remediate the bottom of the Dead End Canal. The BayMarchand pits were excavated between October 1997 and September 1998 with thematerial injected into disposal well City of New Orleans #2 (CNO#2) using theSlurry Fracture Injection (SFI) process. The Dead End Canal was drained andexcavated from February 1999 to March 2000. The canal bottom was excavated toan average depth of 6 ft, to a maximum of 12 ft in any given area. A total of371,600 bbls of material were excavated from the Bay Marchand Pits, and 623,100bbls of canal bottoms were excavated from the Dead End Canal.
- North America > United States > California > Los Angeles County (0.46)
- North America > United States > Louisiana > Orleans Parish > New Orleans (0.24)
- Geology > Geological Subdiscipline > Geomechanics (0.68)
- Geology > Rock Type > Sedimentary Rock > Clastic Rock > Sandstone (0.47)
Not all of the oil emitted from Platform "B" was consumed by the fire. What oil did escape was largely recovered, and damage to the environment from the unrecovered portion was probably negligible. Here is a description of the various methods used to contain and recover the unburned fraction. Introduction Platform "B" in the Bay Marchand Block 2 field was Platform "B" in the Bay Marchand Block 2 field was set in July, 1969. To accelerate development two rigs were simultaneously drilling on the 12-pile, 36-well slot structure located in 55 ft of water. By Dec., 1970, a single-zone well and 21 dual-zone wells had been completed, one slot had been junked, and the rigs were drilling two additional wells. The completed wells produced about 17,500 bbl of oil and 40 MMcf of gas a day. All producing wells except B-21, a single-zone oil well, had Storm Chokes. For completion purposes, a waiver had been granted by the U. S. Geological Survey for that well. All operations were in full compliance with USGS regulations. The fire began at approximately 9:45 a.m. on Dec. 1, 1970. The platform was immediately evacuated. Sixty men were aboard, including four Shell employees. Four men died and 36 were hospitalized. Almost immediately two decisions were made:to let the fire burn and kill the out-of-control wells with relief wells to minimize the amount of oil spilled on the water and to use mobile diversionary systems combining booms and mechanical skimmers to recover oil not consumed by the fire. Equipment to achieve both goals was ordered within hours. This approach was more expensive and time-consuming than extinguishing the fire and capping the wells from the surface. However, it ensured minimal environmental damage from oil spillage. The first drilling rig arrived on Dec. 4. 1970. With the cooperation of other companies who let us use rigs under contract to them, we had five rigs in operation by Dec. 18. Two converted jack-up completion rigs equipped with high-pressure pumping and manifold equipment were brought in for the kill operations. Two spray barges with a combined water output of 14,000 gal/min were used to cool the structure and minimize deterioration of the platform and well tubing and casing. The first well with the largest fire, B-21, was killed on Dec. 30, 1970; this reduced the intensity of the fire by about 40 percent. On April 7, 1971, the tenth and final well killed with a relief well was extinguished The fire from the remaining out-of-control well, B-4, was put out with a water spray and the well was capped. Because of difficulties encountered in achieving communication with it through the relief well, B-4 was brought under control from the surface. Well B-4 was officially dead at 10:14 a.m., April 16, 1971, ending an ordeal that had lasted 136 days and 29 minutes. The pollution control aspects of the fire are described here. The general approach to the entire problem and the engineering considerations in the problem and the engineering considerations in the relief-well program are covered in other papers. Environment Platform "B" stands about 65 miles south of New Platform "B" stands about 65 miles south of New Orleans, in an area of considerable oil and gas activity, both offshore and in the bays. JPT P. 241
- Government > Regional Government > North America Government > United States Government (1.00)
- Energy > Oil & Gas > Upstream (1.00)
ABSTRACT In this study, we did storm surge and wave prediction using meteorological fields re-analyzed in the mesoscale meteorological model around the Caribbean Sea, and reproduced Hurricane Irma. And we evaluated the performance of the mesoscale meteorological model, storm surge prediction model and wave prediction model. We used ds083.3 which is the NCEP FNL (Final) operational global analysis and forecast data as the initial conditions and boundary conditions of the mesoscale meteorological model. Also, as the verification accuracy of the reanalysis of the mesoscale meteorological model, after examining the influence that the moving nests and cumulus parameterization, the difference of the calculation start time have an impact on the weather conditions (atmospheric pressure, wind fields), we did the influence of the four dimensional data assimilation method by using different nudging on the reproduction of it. We considered storm tide around the Caribbean Sea using a few cases which have different route and strength. INTRODUCTION Hurricane Irma, occurred in the Atlantic Ocean at the end of August 2017, developed to Category 5, causing enormous damage to the Caribbean islands and Florida. In Barbuda Island, it recorded about 2.4m storm tide, was damaged by the flood. The observed maximum wind of Irma was 185mph (82m/s) and the minimum central pressure was 914hPa. Including the hurricane Harvey, it was the first time in history over two hurricanes no less than category 4 reached United States of America. In this way, in the future, due to the effects of global warming, there are concerns about the damage caused by much stronger hurricane, so it is important to analyze hurricane and storm surge which have actually occurred. In recent years, the estimation of storm surge and wave using meteorological fields calculated by the mesoscale meteorological model is getting mainstream, for example, Yasuda and Yamaguchi, Kim, Mori, Mase (2009) and, Mori and Shibutani, Takemi, Kim, Yasuda, Niwa, Tsujino, Mase (2014), Toyoda, Yoshino, Arakawa, Kobayashi (2015). Therefore, it is required to analyze meteorological fields accurately. The impact of the calculation conditions of the model on the reproducibility is clarified by small and small (Suzuyama and Shibaki, Ogata, 2011), but the model still depends on the experience of the model user. Therefore, in this study, we evaluate the impact of different model conditions on the reproducibility of it, and estimate storm tide using storm surge prediction model and wave prediction model. Also, we aim to evaluate the performance of each model.