Gulf Oil Spill Highlights the Increasing Dependence on Deep-Sea Robots

Remotely operated subs have met with both success and failure in stanching the flow of crude, and the oil industry may need to rely on completely autonomous vehicles















Share on Tumblr

Deepwater,oil spill,robot, sub

CONTAINMENT BOX: The mobile offshore drilling unit Q4000 lowers a pollution containment chamber May 6, 2010. The chamber was designed to cap the oil discharge that was a result of the Deepwater Horizon incident and is being put in place with the help of robotic subs. Image: © U.S. COAST GUARD/PETTY OFFICER 3RD CLASS PATRICK KELLEY

The work involved in shutting down the nearly 200,000 gallons of crude oil spewing up into the Gulf of Mexico daily for the past two weeks has demanded a tremendous amount of coordination involving, among others, BP, the U.S. Coast Guard and local fishermen. But given the depth of the damaged Macondo well—1,524 meters below the Gulf's surface—the use of undersea robots is the only way to cut off the flow of escaping oil.

Specifically, the robots are remotely operated vehicles (ROVs), and they are playing a major role in efforts to stop each of the three leaks created following an April 20 explosion on board the drilling rig Deepwater Horizon, which killed 11 workers, sunk the rig and damaged the pipeline. (The cause of the explosion remains unknown.)

ROVs are a general-purpose work tool used by drilling companies, "the pickup trucks that deliver tools down to drilling site and specialize in the physical manipulation of objects," says Glenn Sasagawa, development engineer at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography's Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics. Most of these rigs begin drilling too deep for human divers, so the companies use million-dollar ROVs, ranging from 10 to 300 horsepower, for inspection, maintenance and intervention.

Crews capped one of the leaks Tuesday night with the help of robotic subs controlled remotely from a ship on the surface. The ROVs installed a specially designed valve over the end of a leaking drill pipe lying on the sea floor, The New York Times reported Wednesday. The end of the pipe was cut, after which the valve, weighing more than half a ton, was positioned on the seabed, Offshore-mag.com reported Wednesday. The ROVs secured the valve to the broken drill pipe and then closed it, shutting off flow from the pipe.

ROVs have been less successful in capping the leak at the well itself—specifically, by activating the blowout preventer. The Macondo well's blowout preventer is a 12-meter-tall steel structure containing several valves, and it is designed to plug the well in an emergency. The rig's crew was unable to activate the blowout preventer from the rig before it sank. The robots have been unable to reach all of the valves to shut them off, and the ones that the subs have been able to close are leaking.

A third effort underway involves placing a four-story, 100-ton concrete-and-steel containment box on the ocean floor over the largest leak, where 85 percent of the oil is escaping. Workers began lowering the device to the seabed Thursday, but it will likely be Sunday or Monday before it is fully operational.

Crews are positioning the box with the help of ROVs, which are placing buoys around the main oil leak to act as markers to help line up the box as it descends, the Associated Press reported Friday. The underwater robots are also clearing pieces of pipe and other debris from the site where the box will sit. Once in place, a steel pipe will then be attached to a tanker at the surface and connected to the top of the box to move the oil. If the box can contain the bigger leak, a second box being built may be used to stop the smaller leak at the blowout preventer.

As water depths for drilling have increased, engineers have designed the blowout preventers, subsea valve arrangements and other equipment to be handled by ROVs, says Craig Dawe, technical support and operations manager for Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute's Monterey Accelerated Research System in Moss Landing, Calif. "The design is such that the ROV can operate and install valves and other equipment by use of specially built tools or with the ROV manipulators," he explains.

As oil rigs move into ever deeper waters, however, engineers will increasingly depend on subs that can operate autonomously, says Andy Bowen, a research specialist in applied ocean physics and engineering at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Woods Hole, Mass. Humans will act more as supervisors of the work these autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs) do, rather than directly controlling thrusters, arms and other equipment on the sub.

Operators can communicate with AUVs in several different ways, including low-frequency acoustics for long distances and high-frequency coded acoustics for medium distances, Bowen says. "The robot has to be smart enough to shift elegantly between these different communications modes, each one requiring a different degree of autonomy," he adds.

Bowen envisions a time when operators place one or more autonomous vehicles on the ocean bottom for extended periods of time. This would lead to faster response times when problems arise because the AUVs would act on the basis of their preprogramming before people on board a ship can get to the site, he says. "If [there had been] a vehicle on the sea floor that was providing an intervention capability, it's quite possible that it could have played some meaningful role in how things unfolded with the Deepwater Horizon," he adds.



Rights & Permissions

7 Comments

Add Comment
View
  1. 1. subseaconcierge 12:11 PM 5/8/10

    What about human occupied vehicles? I very astute person once said that, "A picture is worth a thousand words but being there is worth a thousand pictures". ROVs are ideal for the oil patch as they have the power and dexterity needed for intervention tasks. AUVs are mapping/sampling tools for the most part. All are complementary technologies. While BP does the work of stopping the flow, scientists should be doing the job of using the full suite of HOVs, ROVs and AUVs to gather subsea data, samples and images to monitor the situation and then compare to past and future data sets.
    There is no lack of subsea technology in the oil field but there is a dearth of capable science vehicles for deep water.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  2. 2. Memnos 04:52 AM 5/11/10

    Get an adequate number of high altitude weather balloons (deflated) down to a target area above the leak. When deflated they can be easily lowered to depth.

    Use three submersibles, at minimum, to separate the catching glove that forms the intake area. Or use a remotely activated mechanism that can do the same on command, with optical and/or sonographic sensors. Prime the intake with a pump, which may fail, and then get the oil flowing into the balloon/bladder. If you can safely use electrostatic repulsion to provide a marginal assist in balloon/bladder separation, that may help.

    The benefit of this is that you can throw a bunch of these guys down until you get the bugs worked out.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  3. 3. gaetanomarano 05:10 AM 5/11/10

    .
    .
    read about my solution to solve the Gulf of Mexico's oil spill
    .
    http://www.ghostnasa.com/posts2/070oilspillsolution.html
    .
    .

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  4. 4. jtdwyer in reply to gaetanomarano 07:17 AM 5/11/10

    gaetanomarano - I'm no expert, either, but I think you fail to consider the effects produced by the presence of an unknown amount of methane within the well - the original source of the explosion producing the problem leak. I expect that any ignition will not burn oil but will (eventually) produce another methane explosion, pretty much like the previous one.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  5. 5. Saveriano 07:54 PM 5/15/10

    Thanks for the good article. If you are interested in ROVs and how they may sacrifice themselves to plug up spills and what that has to do with Asimov's Laws of Robotics see: http://sandacom.wordpress.com/

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  6. 6. crewsy49 09:05 AM 6/13/10

    Use one of the robots, or modify one if necessary, to remove the bolts holding the riser to the defective BOP. Then lower a, modified if necessary, to the top of the existing BOP and secure it by replacing the bolts that are necessary. You would then be able to shut the newly mounted BOP, like the original should have done and stop the flow. David Crews

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  7. 7. Helenjn 04:37 AM 6/17/10

    Planetresource.net has a Eco friendly solution to clean up the tragedy British Petroleum has created, please watch the video animation:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60bdQQQ3iVw and pass this along to as many people as you know.

    One person can still make a difference in this world, is that simple interactions have a rippling effect. Each time this gets pass along, the hope in cleaning our planet is passed on.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
Leave this field empty

Add a Comment

You must sign in or register as a ScientificAmerican.com member to submit a comment.
Click one of the buttons below to register using an existing Social Account.

More from Scientific American

See what we're tweeting about

Scientific American Editors

Tweets could not be retrieved at this time

Free Newsletters


Get the best from Scientific American in your inbox

Solve Innovation Challenges

Powered By: Innocentive

  SA Digital
  SA Digital

Science Jobs of the Week

Email this Article

Gulf Oil Spill Highlights the Increasing Dependence on Deep-Sea Robots

X
Scientific American MIND iPad

Tap into your MIND

Get Both Print & Tablet Editions for one low price!

Subscribe Now >>

X

Please Log In

Forgot: Password

X

Account Linking

Welcome, . Do you have an existing ScientificAmerican.com account?

Yes, please link my existing account with for quick, secure access.



Forgot Password?

No, I would like to create a new account with my profile information.

Create Account
X

Report Abuse

Are you sure?

X

Institutional Access

It has been identified that the institution you are trying to access this article from has institutional site license access to Scientific American on nature.com. To access this article in its entirety through site license access, click below.

Site license access
X

Error

X

Share this Article

X