Chattak blow-out

Soon afterwards, thousands of panic-stricken villagers deserted their homes. The devastating blaze that leapt over three hundred and fifty feet in the sky was shown on television. Those who watched television were stunned, more so when the State Minister gave a television interview the same day.

He said, "Nothing serious has happened. The place where the blow-out occurred was a gas pocket. So there was no loss." His gospel resounded almost like the previous Energy Minister General Nooruddin Khan's address to the media on June 14, 1997 after the Magurcharra blow-out. What a resemblance.

An intriguing question that provoked our mind: does history repeat itself? If it does, what is the burden of it? Does it spell out for us as an inexorable doom, which we can merely await with folded hands -- resigning ourselves to a fate that we cannot avert or modify by our effort?

History reveals that this is the fourth occasion since the mid-1950s that blow-outs occurred while drilling for oil/gas in this country.

This time the drilling operation was very short lived. It was initiated on December 31, 2004 and terminated in eight days on January 8, 2005. Indeed it was a new kind of new-year gift for the nation!

The blow-out of Chattak (West) was a mirror image of the Magurcharra (Sylhet) blow-out in 1997 and the Haripur (Sylhet) blow-out in 1955. In Magurcharra alone, besides loss of private properties, forest and vegetation (environmental damage), the loss of natural gas was worth about $650 million (equivalent to Tk 3900 crore). But no compensation was received from Occidental/Unocal. With pain and disappointment we read the newspaper reports that the disaster that occurred at Chattak sustained a gas loss of about $27 million that is equivalent to about Tk 1600 crores.

If that is true, what a colossal loss for the nation.

In our opinion, the roots of the problem are two fold: first, legal issues relating to the joint venture contract between Niko and Bapex; and second, technical issues relating to the blow-out itself.

Although there were warnings from respected citizens including the piece published in The Daily Star (A Gas Contract or Robbery, Nuruddin Mahmud Kamal, July 7, 2001), neither the government nor Petrobangla paid any attention to them. Instead they planned their course of action to award the contract to Niko, a company reportedly registered in a far-away and obscure island. This created a social protest, the outburst of which might come any time.

The Chattak episode has a shady background. In all probability an invisible power lobby drew up a master plan, and in connivance with the bureaucracy, discovered a new animal called "procedure" violating the Petroleum Act, 1974, and the policies enunciated under it, including the Petroleum Policy, 1993.

The actual intent of formulating the "procedure" -- as we understand -- was to process with lightning speed the case of awarding Niko three suspended gas fields (Chattak, Feni, and Kamta).

These gas fields were never abandoned, nor did any Petrobangla/government document record them as abandoned (as stated in the Petrobangla press release dated January 10, 2005), nor were considered outside the purview of Production Sharing Contract (PSC).

In fact, Chattak-1 drilling was accomplished in 1960. Production continued up to 1985, producing a total of 27 billion cubic feet of gas and was then suspended on technical grounds. Chattak-2 drilling came up after forty-six years and has ended with a big bang. This gave a new jolt in the mind of our people. They will be horrified when they hear about the intrigue between Petrobangla/MEMR and Niko.

There is already a mounting dissatisfaction about Niko's performance. An increasing public suspicion and distrust is brewing about the actions of the Ministry of Energy and the Niko/Bapex agreement, as well as the sincerity and motives of both. We genuinely feel that the time is ripe to raise objections to their unholy alliance. Our first observation is about the abortive drilling of Chattak-2.

Drilling for finding oil/gas is indeed a highly technical task and it should not have been awarded to an inexperienced foreign company when Bapex was available for the purpose.

As we examined the chain of events that led to the blow-out at Chattak-2 we found that:

Initially the well drilled through an unconsolidated sandstone layer (geologically termed as Tipam Sand) at shallow depth. Then the drill bit had to cut through much harder shale layers between 500-625m (known geologically as Upper Marine Shale or UMS).

The drilling continued up to 807m through sand and shale layer, when the operation took a pause for pulling, and drilling restarted after addition of drill pipes (at the base of the drilling derrick).

As the pulling out proceeded, at 466m there was a gas kick which was either ignored or considered a normal phenomena in drilling by the drilling crew of the Chinese drilling contractor

Due to faulty drilling design, the casing was installed up to only 300m. The pulling out operation was facing difficulties due to the swabbing effect -- gas was drawing upward resulting in forceful upward flow of gas. The gas kick hit the rig platform from below and gave a big jerk.

Realizing some problem, the drilling crew shut the well with the blow-out preventor (BOP) placed at the top of the well. Apparently, the drillers thought that the well was controlled, but in no time the operation failed.

In the meantime, there was another mishap in the underground of Chattak-2 well. Since the loose sand layer above the gas zone and Upper Marine Shale was not protected by proper casing up to the required depth (for further protecting the drill hole as is standard practice), the drill hole remained open (beyond 300m) and gas from the well entered the loose sand layer and spread out all across the layer, fracturing it at several hundred points.

Gas continued to flow upward through the fractures and vented out at several places on the surface outside the well and surrounding the well site. This created a pond like area where gas bubbles are emanating even today, similar to the scene at Haripur in Sylhet (1955).

Immediately after the blow-out, the Chinese drilling crew vanished, so did other foreign drilling personnel. The Niko company man was not seen in the vicinity (allegedly he was not present on the drill site on that vital day). Admittedly, a crisp and succinct account of the episode might be difficult to comprehend because the coterie against it has become hyperactive not to allow unveiling of facts and figures to the public. Rather, the opposite is happening, as can be observed from the television interviews, press releases, and the Niko representatives childish statement in the media. Thanks to the media, the discomfiture of the interviewee showed up clearly on the television screen. Meanwhile, we have examined and analyzed some data and information, the initial interpretation of which indicates that:

The blow-out was not an accident, rather it was the result of a combination of faulty well design and anomalous techniques adopted for securing the well structure for drilling.

There was a highly inadequate line of defense to combat the anticipated crisis moments in drilling.

This was due to inexperience and unprofessional approach in planning and designing the well in a known geologic structure.

To clarify further, we urge our readers to appreciate that it is a common knowledge that drilling a development well is almost risk-free and Chattak-2 was a well of that kind only 200m from the original Chattack-1 production well. Some professionals even wondered how Niko could organize such a disaster? But Niko was unnerved. They continued to express their chagrin in theatrical fashion. Perhaps they thought their partners would back them up without any question. But the facts were not on their side.

(Part II to follow tomorrow)

The authors are researchers in energy related activities. Mr. Nuruddin Mahmud Kamal is a retired Additional Secretary to the Government; Mr. SKM Abdullah is former Chairman of Petrobangla; Dr. Nurul Islam is Professor, Department of Chemical Engineering, BUET; Dr. Khalilur Rahman Chowdhury is Professor, Department of Geological Sciences, Jahangirnagar University; and Dr. ASM Ubaid Ullah is Professor, Department of Geology