So, Can it be shut in and then restarted? will it damage what's left of the field?
rockdoc123 wrote:It might have been different if the drone strike had been on gathering systems, or individual wells but it was downstream at the refineries which is much less problematic for the field.
The attack on the KSA export facilities was an act of war by Iran.
the northern Yemenis rebels have claimed responsibility.....
Plantagenet wrote:the northern Yemenis rebels have claimed responsibility.....
Rather then automatically accepting everything the Yemenis rebels say, I suggest we look at all the available evidence. The US has AWACs style air cover at all times in this area, and no doubt will be able to determine the exact source of the attack. US Sec. of State Pompeo has already pointed the finger at Iran...chances are the US military and the US government already know what happened and the US will likely release this data at some point in the future.
Even if this was a drone attack that originated in Yemen, the drones that did the attack can operate over 900 miles of territory and are an advanced high tech military weapon system that was supplied by the Iranian military. Tehran had to approve transferring these advanced weapons to Yemen, and chances are Tehran was involved in planning the attack, and its also likely there were Iranian technicians operating the drones that carried out this attack.
These drones require operators and a high-tech communications center to control them. I doubt such a high tech communications center exists in any of the Yemeni rebels caves or tents.
IMHO, we're going to find out eventually that Iran's fingerprints are all over this attack on KSA.
Cheers!
Even if this was a drone attack that originated in Yemen, the drones that did the attack can operate over 900 miles of territory and are an advanced high tech military weapon system that was supplied by the Iranian military. Tehran had to approve transferring these advanced weapons to Yemen, and chances are Tehran was involved in planning the attack, and its also likely there were Iranian technicians operating the drones that carried out this attack.
These drones require operators and a high-tech communications center to control them. I doubt such a high tech communications center exists in any of the Yemeni rebels caves or tents.
rockdoc123 wrote:Even if this was a drone attack that originated in Yemen, the drones that did the attack can operate over 900 miles of territory and are an advanced high tech military weapon system that was supplied by the Iranian military. Tehran had to approve transferring these advanced weapons to Yemen, and chances are Tehran was involved in planning the attack, and its also likely there were Iranian technicians operating the drones that carried out this attack.
Again "likely" is not proof. You wanting it to be Iranians in charge doesn't make it so. You state it was supplied by the Iranian military yet you have no proof other than perhaps a view that they are bad Persians who hate Saudis and Americans. You realize the northern Yemenis have a slogan "God is great, death to the US, death to Israel, curse the Jews, and victory for Islam", I suspect they have as much reason to be blamed. The Iranians supply arms and equipment to the Yemenis, and the US supplies the Saudis with arms and other equipment. Is the US then at fault for any Saudi sponsored terrorism? The US sells arms to lots of countries and there are no conditions as to what the buyer does with said arms.These drones require operators and a high-tech communications center to control them. I doubt such a high tech communications center exists in any of the Yemeni rebels caves or tents.
Have you ever been to Yemen? You realize that the rebels occupy Saana the capital, a city which has been the centre of first Jewish then Islamic history in this part of the world for nearly 3000 years? For someone who travels as much as you do such a comment is incredibly insular.
You state it was supplied by the Iranian military yet you have no proof ....
Plantagenet wrote:You state it was supplied by the Iranian military yet you have no proof ....
The Iranians have spent years copying US drone technology and the Iranians have recently unveiled a well-developed drone program, with several drone models and remote control systems to "fly" the drones from a base. As far as we know the Houthis do not manufacture drones and do have this kind of technology.
Now think about those facts.
How do you imagine the Houthis got the sophisticated drones used in the attacks if they don't manufacture these sophisticated drones themselves?
Think about it. How did that happen?
I can explain this again in even simpler language for you if you still don't understand.
CHEERS!
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
As I understand it if a field that is under artificial water drive is allowed to rest for six months or longer a considerable quantity of the remaining oil MAY migrate internally separating from the water layer and gathering higher in the formation.
A) Is that an accurate understanding?
B) Is this likely to happen in Ghawar?
c) If this does happen my understanding is it will result in a month or more of greatly reduced water cut when pumping resumes, is that true?
rockdoc123 wrote:So, Can it be shut in and then restarted? will it damage what's left of the field?
the field is on water drive which means full pressure support. When fields run into problems with regards to restarts it is almost always related to lack of pressure. Aramco has spent an enormous amount of manpower, computer power and money on digitizing virtually everything related to their oilfields. A shutdown would be managed through their SmartField project which captures pressure, temperature, gas, water etc all measured at the wellhead and in the newer wells with downhole sensors. That data is integrated with the gathering system data, water knockout, separators etc so that pressure throughout the system would be maintained.
Given the amount of controls they have plus the fact that Ghawar has been subjected to countless full-field models means there is likely very little chance of permanent damage. It might have been different if the drone strike had been on gathering systems, or individual wells but it was downstream at the refineries which is much less problematic for the field. Bad news for production (no where to take it) but not for field life.
evilgenius wrote:So, they are way more vulnerable to a cyber attack? It looks like, from what's been said above, that a cyber attack that spoofed sensors could damage Ghawar. How long would such a thing have to go on before it was noticed in ways other than various people's computer readouts? Are the chances good that it would be caught in time?
I don't know. But just because the US is stupid about that, should we assume KSA is also?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 29 guests