Dr. James Fetzer:
[18 minutes: 39 seconds into The Real Deal] This is
Jim Fetzer, your host on the Real Deal, with my very special
guest for this segment, Charles Pegelow, who is a structural
engineer with a lot of experience in the oil industry. Charles,
I am very interested in your take in what is going on in the
Gulf of Mexico, especially with regard to what you think is
happening with the apparatus, the drill hole, the physical environment
there on the basin of the Gulf of Mexico. Anything you can tell
us about that would be most welcome.
Charles Pegelow: OK, first let me start off
by saying I don't think anybody knows with a well flowing out
like that. You can't get instruments down there, cameras or
anything like that. BP is probably sitting on most of the information
and whom they are telling and whom they are not, I don't know.
And in all fairness, a lot of the information will be proprietary,
concerning the reservoir and the bore hole. Now what I think
seems to be evident from what little I am hearing is they may
have a real serious problem at the depth that they are at, in
other words, they may have the integrity of the casing deep
down may have been compromised. Like I say, we don't know, we
don't have any direct evidence. We just have circumstantial
evidence is the only thing. No one seems to be talking. It seems
like everybody's attention is being kept on the oil-soaked birds
and the dead turtles.
Dr. Fetzer: And of course that is the trivia,
right, that is the minor damage. I mean the serious damage is
what is going on beneath the surface.
Pegelow: Yes. Like I say, I don't think anybody
knows for sure what is going on, at least outside of the close-knit
group within BP. But rumors are circulating around. Like I said,
we don't know what is true or what is not true, but apparently
it seems like something may have been compromised deep down,
and what has come out is that there are locations of leaks seeping
up through the ocean floor which are not at the drill site.
Which indicate the type down there is fractured or broke. And
under the types of pressures that this has been leaking out,
coming up through another channel, coming up outside of the
ocean floor. I will say that it appears to be a monstrous effort,
to try to contain this thing. There is supposed to be more than
forty ships out there employed by BP along with perhaps maybe
40,000 personnel. And this is including people who are working
on the rig. Several companies who are operating remotely operated
vehicles, plus onshore support staff. Plus you have got two
deepwater drilling rigs out there attempting to drill relief
holes to get down there and try to pump cement in to plug up
whatever is leaking.
Dr. Fetzer: I have heard estimates Charles
that there could be eventually as much as a billion barrels
of oil that will come out of this gusher.
Pegelow: What estimates I have heard of is
what has leaked out so far has only been about 2% of what is
in the reservoir.
Dr. Fetzer: Doesn't that have enormous potential
impact on not just the Gulf of Mexico, but the oceans of the
world in general?
Pegelow: Yes, I have seen several estimates
about what they call the "loop current." By about
Day 70, which will be about five days from now, it should start
swinging it around the lower end of Florida in the Gulf Stream.
From there the oil or pollution runs up the East Coast quite
rapidly and within less than a month, will be hitting the British
Isles. At this point it is probably pretty well diluted, but
it is still there. You know off Cape Hataras Fisheries and Nova
Scotia and all that area. So it may be, depending on how much
gets out there, it may be a pretty big disaster happening.
Dr. Fetzer: And of course if it keeps gushing
out, I mean what is diluted now may become much less diluted
with the vast volume that seems to be in that reservoir which
I understand was the second largest in the world.
Pegelow: Well I don't know if it was the second
largest in the world, but it is a huge reservoir that they hit,
and it is under enormous pressures. It is in first of all in
5,000 feet of water and then below the surface it is approximately
18,000 feet. So we are talking about 23,000 feet. And just to
give you an idea, some of the pressures, I have heard all kind
of estimates of pressures. Could be 40,000 psi or over a 100.
But I can tell you a starting point. If you were to take 5,000
feet of seawater, which is 64 pounds per square foot, we are
just going to calculate how much force is down there, and assuming
rock -- there is different layers going down -- but assume an
average of 180 pounds per cubic foot, you get somewhere in the
neighborhood of over 20 - 23 - 24,000 pounds per square inch.
That is enormous pressure. And don't forget it is balanced.
It is balanced at the surface of the reservoir or the cap rock.
That is the overhead pressure balanced by the under pressure,
except since this is a reservoir, there is compressed gas that
has been building up in there for eons. So that is where they
are talking about where the pressures could be as high as 40-
60,000 - and even higher pounds per square inch. And that is
a lot of pressure, let me tell you.
Dr. Fetzer: Does this mean too that if the
reports that I have read that say that the containment, you
know, the casing in which the oil is supposed to be emerging
to come out of the reservoir is itself shattered, if what is
coming up is working as an abrasive, and if it is tearing it
apart, then isn't it going to open up the access route for the
oil coming to the surface potentially allowing vastly more to
emerge in a shorter time?
Pegelow: Yes. I think when you get high flow
rates, you start getting what is called non ripple flow, which
is you start to get little eddy currents circulating, and you
Just what you get out of a submarine or might get out of propellers
of ships. This kind of cavitation. Now in an oil reservoir,
when you talk about an oil reservoir, basically these are permeable
rocks like sandstone or limestone, like it is a giant cavern
full of oil and gas. If you get that much flow, it is going
to start picking up chunks of sandstone and rock and other stuff
and basically under high flow rates it will start abrasing the
side of the case, basically eating it through. That may be what
is going on. Or it may have already done it during the initial
blowout that they have. So like I say we don't know, we can
only speculate what is going on. But in any way, in any case,
it seems like it is a race against time by getting these relief
wells down there and trying to pump in cement and just cement
everything in. It seems like it is a race against time, is what
these things normally are to try to stop the flow.
Dr. Fetzer: Do you think there is any actual
possibility of stopping the flow, because it seems to me with
all the fractures on the Gulf floor, that it has really become
Pegelow: I think a lot of that is fractured
anyway. It may have found a way up, like I say it may have found
a channel up, but certainly I think that anything is possible
to go ahead and clog it up with cement. But like I say, there
is a possibility that things could get out of control, and could
it get worse. The Russians, well-known for having very deep
wells, that got out of control, and one of these was a gas well
in what I believe was the [unintelligible] [Soviet]
republic, that went on for two years. [Editor's note, Mr.
Pegelow is probably referring to the Urtabulak gas field in
Southern Uzbekistan about 80 km southeast of Bukhara, which
went out of control in 1963 and was sealed by a nuke in 1966.
See the 29 May 2010 article Let’s
seal the Gulf oil well by using atomic weapons!
by "Fabius Maximus"]. It was a huge thing, and what
they ended up doing was using a nuclear bomb to collapse the
earth and stop the gas from coming out. So --
Dr. Fetzer: Do you think that is a possibility
in this instance?
Pegelow: Well, I don't know. I have to say
I have got no experience in some respects. What I do know is
that right after this happened it was within about a week the
Russians came with this proposal to -- I don't know who in our
government -- to stop this. And what is interesting about it
is that apparently the Russians [unintelligible] who are not
our friends, but they most certainly keep a close eye on everything
that goes on in our country. That was real surprising. But like
I say, they claim to have succeeded four out of five times.
The difference is that they were on land, and not under about
a mile deep in water. That was the big difference.
Dr. Fetzer: Yes, that mile deep water makes
a huge, huge difference in terms of how much room to maneuver
and your options, I presume.
Pegelow: On land, it just tends to stay within
your county, or something, but in the ocean -- [it can spread].
Then the other potential thing is temperatures in that reservoir
are 400 degrees. So you wouldn't want some type of blowout,
all that pressures released. You actually would have some kind
of cavern and have water sucked down in there. At 400 degrees,
it would flash into steam, and then you really would have an
explosion. I had no idea how bad it would be or anything like
that but I am reminded, I don't know if you ever recall 1883
Volcano that blew up and was heard around the world.
Dr. Fetzer: Yes, yes. Very famous, yes.
Pegelow: On that, the magma chamber blew open,
but really I forgot how many cubic miles of dirt blown into
the atmosphere, the earth's temperature dropped over the next
three years a degree and a half. Once that magma chamber opened
up, all the sea water rushed in and this flashed into steam
and the potential from what I read from geologists, is this
was equivalent to something like a thousand Hiroshima bombs
Dr. Fetzer: So if we had something like that
in the Gulf, it would be catastrophic.
Pegelow: Well, this has never happened. Well
of course it would be catastrophic. The thing
is, a situation like this has never happened before. We don't
have any experience with what happens with a runaway well underwater
that deep. You know, if you can't stop it, the closest experience
I guess we got is the middle of 1979 off the coast of Mexico
in what is called the Bay of Campeche. Pemex was drilling a
well called IXTOC-1;
I-X-T-O-C Well #1. But they were only in 160 feet of water.
The well below the mud line was, I think about 8,000 feet. In
other words it was half the depth of what this is. That thing
went on for, I guess, almost a year. Up until now, it was one
of the biggest leaks of oil in the world. It took them a year
to finally put it out. But on that well, I don't believe that
I ever heard that the casing was compromised.
Dr. Fetzer: Was the damage done by that well
-- was the oil restricted to a specific locale?
Pegelow: It mainly was around Mexico. Although
a lot of the oil just fell out, the head components fell out
and went to the sea floor. And then along the Texas Coast there
was a lot of oil that washed up all along the South Texas Coast.
But along the South Texas Coast, it is not as environmentally
sensitive I guess as Louisiana. In Louisiana, the swamps go
for miles inland. And this is for the Gulf of Mexico, a big
breeding ground for fishes and shrimp. All the mangrove swamps
and all the reed swamps. This is a big breeding ground for,
I don't know, maybe about half the fish in the Gulf of Mexico.
So that is another thing that makes this so serious.
Dr. Fetzer: It is very scary, Charles. It is
going to destroy not just the livelihood of all the fisherman
and the shrimp industry and all that, but all the forms of life
in the Gulf that are so essential to the food chain that supports,
you know, a higher species.
Pegelow: Yes, it would change it, and then
of course I guess you heard last week that the EPA in a town
called Venice, Louisiana -- now Venice, Louisiana is south and
east of New Orleans. It is east of the Mississippi River. It
is [unintelligible] on a peninsula like a barrier island. A
lot of the shrimp boats and stuff there. The EPA had measured
levels, and this was in the month of May, OK. EPA had measured
a high level in one day of benzene of like about 34 parts per
billion. High levels of hydrogen sulfide. Now these vary day
to day. Some days there was not hardly any, and some days there
was a lot. So anyway with benzene and hydrogen sulfide -- with
benzene I believe the safe level is like zero to four parts
per billion. Hydrogen sulfide is like 30 parts per billion.
And they were measuring like 1,200 of hydrogen sulfide. You
know hydrogen sulfide is a deadly gas, and benzene, that is
basically a cancer agent, and causes all kinds of other problems
for breathing and health, especially health of children.
Dr. Fetzer: Another terrifying prospect is
that there is an enormous reservoir of gas, explosive gas, that
is something like ten by twenty miles in dimension, that if
it were to explode, that it would cause enormous waves, a tsunami
effect that would sweep over the state of Florida and inland
many miles, and of course the population of all those states
is right there on the coast.
Pegelow: Yes. I have read -- I don't have any
firm data -- I have read that this well is about 40% gas, and
60% oil. And what you say, that would be true if the reservoir
weakened, and it oozed through 18,000 feet of the ocean bottom,
yes, that would be an enormous problem if it cavitated a hole
big enough and finally it just blew through. I don't think the
gas would explode because you have to get enough oxygen. I do
not think there is enough oxygen out there to mix with about
a 4% ratio. I think what would happen is that it would push
the water aside, and then it would suck the water back in, and
then what happens down in this reservoir 400 hundred degrees
if the water flashed into steam, yes, you would be setting up
some big tidal waves out there. Like I said, this has never
happened before in the deep oceans, and nobody knows what could
happen, but I guess it is within a matter of possibility. We
just don't know.
Dr. Fetzer: I lived in Florida for, I don't
know, five years or so, in the Sarasota, Bradenton area, and
of course the average elevation of the state is less than a
couple of feet. I mean, it is just stunning to think what could
happen here, Charles.
Pegelow: Oh yes, if a scenario like that happened,
yes, I guess it would be the end of Florida.
Dr. Fetzer: I think it would, and just imagine
if millions of people are forced out of their homes and heading
north, I mean it could be a survival of the fittest scenario
where they are invading people's homes and trying to take their
cars and vehicles and their food and all that out of necessity.
Pegelow: That is if anybody is still alive.
I think that scenario came from Terrence Aym, whose article
came out last week. [Editor's Note, Mr. Pegelow may mean the
How BP Gulf disaster may have triggered a 'world-killing' event].
And right now I think it is going viral on the Internet. There
is a couple of things I don't think is quite true in there,
and I don't know where his news sources are. And don't forget,
he is not a physicist, geologist, or engineer. One thing he
says is this tidal wave would go 50 feet onshore. From whatever
I have ever seen of tsunamis, is the maximum they get on shore
is about five miles. So I don't know if it would actually wash
over Florida or not. I don't think we have ever had a tidal
wave in the Gulf of Mexico except for maybe a hundred thousand
years ago with supposedly the asteroid that wiped out the dinosaurs,
which is where the Bay of Campeche is now. So like I say I don't
think we have any experience of something like this. You know
we have got tidal waves caused by earthquakes. And we know where
the fault lines are. And we sort of know when they are going
to happen, I guess, starts to build up a lot of smaller earthquakes.
Like I said, we really don't have an earthquake zone in the
Gulf of Mexico, so we don't have any experience with this.
Dr. Fetzer: Charles, what is his worst case
scenario? What is he describing as possibly happening? Do you
think much of this is true, but much of it is false?
Pegelow: I am not sure that his article he
is actually talking about this gas bubble exploding.
He never mentions about water rushing into perhaps a void in
the reservoir, which is the reservoir 18,000 feet below ground.
The temperatures are about 400 degrees. My guess is he doesn't
seem to mention that. He is probably getting his information
from some geologist. But it seems like most scientists are not
talking right now. Except there is two -- one geologist, I don't
know what he was, one is in the University of Florida, and the
other is Florida State, is it?
Dr. Fetzer: Yes.
Pegelow: They seem to be the only ones going
public on anything, too much. Like I say, it does not seem like
anybody is talking too much.
Dr. Fetzer: Tell me a little more Charles about
the interplay between these various companies like Halliburton
and BP and so forth. We have reports that the BP president sold
a third of his stock a month ago, or so. That Goldman Sachs
unloaded a lot of BP stock, and things like that. Have you picked
up any of that?
Pegelow: Yes, you wonder about foreknowledge
on this. The CEO of BP sold two weeks before this happened one
third of his stock holdings. It was equivalent to somewhere
about six or eight hundred thousand dollars. Somehow Goldman
Sachs is taking a huge short position on stuff, and apparently
there are some others and yes, it sounds like 9/11, selling
American Airlines stocks.
Dr. Fetzer: Yes, yes.
Pegelow: It makes you wonder how Goldman Sachs
knew enough to sell their stock, but apparently they did have
been having problems on this well since they started drilling
it. And it may be because of some of their lack of safety procedures.
It is coming out now that BP is [unintelligible], as far as
accidents in the oil industry, it seems like BP is way ahead
of any of the other major companies as far as accidents around
the world. This includes the Alaska Alyeska
pipe line, and off of Indonesia, the BP, BP bought Amoco, so
it is the old Amoco refinery in Texas City, south of Houston,
has had several accidents. And you just wonder if profits come
before safety or something. But they seem to have a lot of accidents.
A lot more than other majors. And there were rumors around about
BP across the Internet and some other stuff. One is BP is the
operator. They are the owner and they are the operator. And
they hire -- obviously they do not have enough personnel. It
takes a tremendous amount of personnel and expertise and equipment.
So they hire a drilling company, in this case it was Transocean
which owns the rig. Now some people say they are trying to blame
Transocean when BP is basically in control of the rig, and they
tell Transocean what to do. Now as far as Halliburton, in this
case Halliburton has got barges with cement or mud which is
[unintelligible], and they mix it up and use that to pump into
the well. So Halliburton is a subcontractor who is responsible
for cementing the well in. And it sure seems like the cement
plugs did not hold. There should have been three in there. Three
plugs. Halliburton apparently finished, and then BP decided
to remove some mud with what was left in the well put water,.
sea water, in there. And that is when the accident happened.
And then there is another story out there by Schubert.
Now Schlumberger is a well-testing company. They are the Cadillac
of the Cadillac of the industry. You want them to test something,
you can take their test to the bank. Supposedly a crew from
Schlumberger went out there and BP manager told them "We
don't need any test today." Apparently they were arguing,
there was some argument going on about the safety of the situation
out there. And the Schlumberger people said they wanted to leave,
and supposedly the BP manager said, "Well, you are going
to have to stay here, there is another chopper flying out for
weeks. So they called back to their home office, the home office
sent a chopper out there and picked them up, and it was six
hours later when this blow-out happened. So like I say there
are these stories floating around, and you don't know -- there
is obviously people talking but people are not leaving their
names or their positions or something like that. Obviously they
would get fired and never hired again. I would say there are
a lot of stories coming out about what went on as far as the
management or the drilling team on BP's behalf, and none of
it looks good.
Dr. Fetzer: It looks as though they were cutting
every corner they could to maximize their profit, minimize safety,
even though it had the potential for a catastrophe such as is
Pegelow: Well, that is what it looks like.
If you weigh all these stories and rumors out there, they are
all pointing one way. Well, Congress [unintelligible] even a
couple of members of Congress have already said that, so they
are certainly getting more data than what we are allowed to
Dr. Fetzer: Even having the CEO of BP testify
in Congress, he was full of "I don't know" answers,
you know, as though none of these decisions about what was going
on when this major well came across his desk. I thought it was
a ridiculous performance.
Pegelow: Oh well, you know that was the same
with the cigarette industry guys. That is the same with all
of them. I can pretty much guarantee that after about two months,
or after probably about two days, the CEOs are probably going
to know everything that went on out there. So I find that hard
to believe. It is the same thing that happened when they were
questioning the cigarette industry, about what they do about
the dangers of smoking, and cancer and all kinds of other things.
And the automobile industry -- the only one who didn't seem
to get questioned, of course, were the banks, and they got bailed
out. They just handed it to them, right?
Dr. Fetzer: Yes, it was ridiculous. It was
practically no strings attached. It was as though they did not
have to have any collateral or any assurance they would ever
repay it, Charles, it was absurd.
Pegelow: Oh, yes, yes. Well, you wonder what
is really going to happen, is the taxpayer going to end up paying
for the whole thing anyway? So --.
Dr. Fetzer: Isn't there the potential here
for BP to declare bankruptcy, reorganize and never pay a nickel?
Pegelow: I am not an attorney. I don't really
know. Well, they could declare bankruptcy, they have got plenty
of assets. They are making, I think it is every four days they
make a billion dollars or something. I don't know if this is
worldwide, or just under U.S. assets. In the U.S. you know they
bought Amoco which is the old Standard Oil of Ohio, is it? Plus,
the Alyeska pipeline they bought all the companies. In other
words, they are the ones who operated on the North Slope of
Alaska plus refineries associated with Amoco. So they certainly
have a lot of assets. I don't know how you could, I don't know,
I heard one stock broker tell me, he said he thinks what might
happen, he said their stock might get down to pennies on the
dollar and somehow Exxon will somehow end up buying the whole
thing for on the cheap, so --.
Dr. Fetzer: So Exxon will grow bigger as BP
Pegelow: Yes, well I don't know, that was his
take on it. He said that he thinks that what happened is Exxon
will initially end up, pennies on the dollar, is what he said.
Like I said, we don't know at this point. I think the offshore
forces, what they have been paying, has been costing them somewhere
in the neighborhood of perhaps 800 million to perhaps a billion
dollars already to try to stop this thing.
Dr. Fetzer: Do you think there is any reason
to think this was done deliberately?
Pegelow: Well, I can't imagine -- but like
I said, the only thing is all of a sudden all these people come
up, the CEO, and Goldman Sachs, making some money off this disaster.
It is almost like 9/11 all over again. What was his name, Conrad?
And some of these other people who were shorting the airline
stocks. It makes you wonder what kind of crystal ball they are
looking at. I certainly didn't see it in any of my BP stock.
Dr. Fetzer: I understand that they trace back
those shorts on 9/11 to the CIA and concluded that of course
they could not have possibly have been complicit, as naive as
that may sound.
Pegelow: I think you are referring over to
Germany, I think his name was Conrad who was an ex-CIA high
up in the CIA who had sold a bunch of airline stocks.
Dr. Fetzer: I was thinking of all the shorts,
you know, where you bet that the airline stock is going to drop
and I thought that Lee Hamilton and Thomas Kuhn had both reported
that they had tracked the source of those shorts and they couldn't
possibly be involved. And it was because it was CIA.
Pegelow: OK, I am not familiar with that. I
mean, I would not doubt it.
Dr. Fetzer: Charles, would you say this is
the culmination of decades of deregulation that have been promoted
by the Republican Party? Do you think there any possibility
of political ramifications that are going to work against the
Pegelow: It is both Republicans and Democrats.
They both sit on these committees, and what it was under Bush
they relaxed some restrictions. They hadn't blowout preventers
because some of the oil companies were griping they did not
want to have to spend an extra million dollars for additional
things. A second set of shear
rams and stuff like that. So they are operating in deep
water here in the Gulf of Mexico and they could not operate
in the North Sea that way. They would not allow them to use
this dispersant called Corexit 9500.
Dr. Fetzer: Yes.
Pegelow: That is not allowed practically anyplace
else, except it is allowed here. The other thing is after that
IXTOP-1 well, is what happened is that the sheer rams, which
are actually for the final safety thing that are just supposed
to cut the pipe and seal it, they had the drill string in there
and where the joints on the drill string are very thick, so
after that, they decided that it was probably best for two sets
of shear rams in there. It wouldn't cost a lot of money to put
that in there and maybe you can't have some other major [thing]
in there that you might want for well testing or something like
that. So this thing, the blow-out, what you call the blow-out
preventer, was sitting on the bottom of the ocean. I think it
is was almost like four stories tall. And it is very complex.
You need to get lots of testing and stuff like that. They are
quite expensive. I don't know what this one or that would have
cost. I know that in shallow waters, these things in a thousand
feet of water can run several million dollars, so this may have
been eight or ten million dollars total. Just for the blow-out
Dr. Fetzer: But was there a blow-out preventer
in this case?
Pegelow: Oh yes, there was one, and somehow
the shear rams did not seem to entirely close and there was
apparently some of the hydraulic lines that, apparently some
of the hydraulic lines were leaking. Apparently it was not able
to develop the sort of pressure to cut it. So that is what I
am hearing so far. But if they had a second set, at least you
have got a 100% backup, right?
Dr. Fetzer: Yes, Charles, Charles --
Pegelow: Yes, then there are some --
Dr. Fetzer: Go ahead.
Pegelow: Then they also have another thing
they call acoustical, and that acoustical I believe will automatically
set it off. Instead of having someone on the deck having to
press a button, what happened on the deck is they had an explosion
of gas bubbles hopped out of there and apparently had an explosion
that killed everybody, so apparently someone just was able to
get to the sheer Ra,s and hit the button, but they should have
had an automatic deal that apparently they did not have on this.
You know, it really is kind of funny if you are going on something
this critical you would think that you would have 100% backup
on everything, you know.
Dr. Fetzer: Yes, it is quite unnerving Charles.
Listen, I want to thank you for taking the time to discuss these
matters with me and our audience. I think that they are really
crucial. You have offered a lot of insights into what is going
Pegelow: Like I said, we really don't have
enough information. In a court room you have got what is called
direct evidence, and circumstantial. So what is coming out now
is a lot of circumstantial.We have basically no direct evidence.
Tony Hayward is not telling us exactly what happened. And we
have a lot of circumstantial, and from that circumstantial I
guess that is where you speculate "why is this?" These
tend to be the answers you come up with.
Dr. Fetzer: Charles, I want to thank you for
coming on the show. This is Jim Fetzer, your host on the Real
Deal concluding my conversation with my special guest this segment.
Charles Pegelow, a structural engineer with extensive experience
in the oil industry. Thank you so much Charles.
Pegelow: OK, thank you. [55:51]
Background on Charles Pegelow from the web page:
Engineer Discusses WTC Collapse Theories" at 911Blogger.com
A Structural Engineer, Charles N. Pegelow, was a surprise guest
on Jim Fetzer's radio program today (August 24, 2006).
Listen to the archived program; Jim Fetzer's "Non-Random
Thoughts" - Thursday, August 24, 2006 (Pegelow is in the
2nd hour, David Ray Griffin in the 1st hour.)
...and hear the guy speak for himself.
B. S. Civil Engineering 1972, Lamar University
B. S. Mathematics 1972, Beaumont,Texas
Present: FULTON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY - private consulting engineer/
1998: Contract Engineering - Paragon Engineering Inc. (Houston,
1) Shell Nigeria onshore gas gathering compressor flow stations
and pipeline export station.
2) Mozambique - offshore field development and design for 4
caisson platforms and one central gas export caisson platform.
1997: Contract Engineering - Reading and Bates (Brownsville,
Structural / construction project engineer for the upgrade of
Rig 41 for 1000 meters drilling depth. Engineering, construction,
scope of work for the support steel for the riser turn-down
sheaves, substructure reinforcement, and many miscellaneous
1994-1996: Contract Engineering - Fulton Construction Company
1994-1995: Hudson - McDermott (Houston)
LNG plant and export terminal for Trinidad. Cost optimization
study and conceptual design for jetty and dredging, preparing
bid tender documents and design specifications for jetty design
/ gangway / dredging / bulk steel / nav-aids / and misc. items.
Plant foundation and steel design.
1979-1993: Conoco, Inc. (Houston)
Company project structural engineer and design engineer on various
projects including drilling and production platforms, gaslift
injection platforms, living quarters platforms, and many miscellaneous
deck extensions, skids, and access platforms. Duties included
feasibility studies, reviewing and writing specifications, design
calculations, computer input/output, review/checking structural
drawings, scope of work, design premises for outside source
work, interfacing with other disciplines, and writing various
1977-1979: Brown and Root, Inc. (Houston)
Structural designer of Gulf of Mexico type platforms. Also mud
slide resistant platforms. Deck design, jacket tubular, foundation
analysis, flotation and launch analysis, lifting and installation
1976: King-Wilkinson Ltd. (Scotland, U.K.)
Project management team for the installation of Occidental Petroleum's
Claymore "A" platform. Duties included structural
design of pile elevator clamps, pile alignment clamps, miscellaneous
installation skids and platforms. Review and recommendation
of bids for grouting and pile driving. Also, rigging review,
pile driving sequence, and module installation.
1974-1976: Earl and Wright Consulting Engineer, SEDCO (San
Structural design of North Sea type platforms, deck modules,
large tubular joints, control capsules, deck support trusses,
punching shear design, and parameter study for laterally loaded
large diameter piles for Arabian Gulf SBM's, Semi-submersible
1972-1974: Associated Engineering Consultants (Houston)
Structural design, analysis, drafting and checking of structural
drawings for commercial buildings. Steel structures, foundation,
post tension concrete structures, tilt-up construction and high
rise building structures.
CODES: Use of following national and industry codes: ASIC,
API RP 2A, ANSI 58.1 (AISC), UBC, DNV, ASME Div. VIII vessel.
User profile for Charles
N. Pegelow at Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth