Posted in Uncategorized | 5 Comments »
Attached are my comments on BOEM’s proposed revisions to the decommissioning financial assurance regulations. These comments were submitted to Regulations.gov yesterday (3 days early 😀). Bud
Concluding Remarks
- MMA’s highest priority must be assuring that facilities are safely decommissioned without public funding. Supplemental financial assurance determinations and lease assignment approvals must be consistent with that priority.
- Predecessor liability is an important financial assurance principle, but legal boundaries and administrative procedures must be clearly established.
- Safety and compliance are inextricably related to financial performance, and must be considered in determining supplemental assurance requirements.
- Using reserve estimates to reduce supplemental assurance exposes taxpayers to geologic and accounting risks.
- Unacceptable public risks have resulted from financial assurance decisions intended to advance offshore wind development.
Posted in California, decommissioning, energy policy, Gulf of Mexico, Offshore Energy - General, Regulation | Tagged BOEM, comments, decommissioning, financial assurance, predecessor liability, proposed regulation, reserve estimates, safety and compliance | 1 Comment »
An apology letter from the California Coastal Commission (CCC) to SpaceX was part of a lawsuit settlement. SpaceX alleged political bias in the commission’s 2024 decision to deny increased Falcon 9 launches at Vandenberg Space Force Base, based on comments about Elon Musk’s political views and SpaceX’s labor practices.
Excerpt:
“In 2024, the Commission reviewed consistency determinations by the U.S. Space Force for SpaceX’s Falcon 9 launch program at Vandenberg Space Force Base. During that review, some Commissioners made negative comments about SpaceX’s labor practices and its Chief Executive Officer’s political views. The Commission acknowledges that these political comments were irrelevant to the Commission’s consistency review and were improper, and the Commissioners apologize for those comments.”
AI confirms my suspicions that formal CCC apologies are highly unusual 😉
Posted in California, Regulation | Tagged California Coastal Commission, launches, Sable Offshore, SpaceX, Vandenberg, written apology | Leave a Comment »
Update: Another EIA revision to Gulf of America oil production for Dec. 2025 (1.994 to 1.985 million bopd) means that 2019 retains the production record by the narrowest of margins – 1.898 to 1.897 million bopd. Stay tuned because this may not be the final word 😉.
Per EIA, Feb. 2026 production dipped a bit to 1.931 million bopd (chart below).
Meanwhile, California OCS oil production for FEB continued at about 10,000 bopd. This number may increase a bit for March, and more for April data when the first Sable sales are included. A big increase, by as much as 500%, should be apparent in the June report barring a court ordered shutdown.
Posted in California, Gulf of Mexico, Offshore Energy - General | Tagged 2025 vs. 2019, California oil production, Gulf of America, record oil production, Sable Offshore | Leave a Comment »
Sable’s updated PowerPoint presentation is attached.
Also, the 2025 compensation package for Sable CEO Jim Flores is attracting attention. Flores received $76 million in total compensation. The bulk of his pay came from more than $69 million in stock awards, alongside a $1.3 million salary and a $3.9 million bonus.
Posted in California, Offshore Energy - General | Tagged compensation, Jim Flores, PowerPoint, Sable Offshore, update | Leave a Comment »
Equinor has cut planned investments in renewable energy by roughly EUR 3.5bn for 2026–2027, while the company maintains and expects growth in oil and gas production.
Cheap shot from panicked Ørsted investor:
“From a sustainability perspective, it’s certainly sad that one of the most ‘green’ fossil fuel companies now turns out to have merely been a ‘tourist’ in the green sector, but unfortunately, that’s just the way things are these days,” says Anders Schelde, investment chief at AkademikerPension, according to Finans.
Perhaps the premium for climate virtue signaling has shrunk, and Equinor, like other energy giants, is making a prudent business decision for its shareholders, which include the Norwegian govt.
Meanwhile, what are the implications for Equinor’s offshore wind investments in the US? Equinor’s embattled Empire Wind project is probably too far along to reverse course. Their Central Atlantic (Lease 0557) and California (Lease 0563, Atlas Wind) may be a different story. However, buyback negotiations would be complicated by the Empire Wind situation, and perhaps by the Norwegian government’s 2/3 ownership. On the other hand, Equinor is a significant oil and gas leaseholder in the Gulf of America, so they would have ample options for investing wind lease rebates.
Posted in Norway, Offshore Energy - General, Offshore Wind | Tagged Atlas Wind, California offshore wind sale, Central Atlantic Wind, Empire Wind, Equinor, Equinor changes emphasis, Orsted | Leave a Comment »
From the Dept. of the Interior:
Why This Change Is Happening
The transition reflects more than a decade of operational experience managing offshore resources. By consolidating the planning, permitting, inspection, and enforcement responsibilities currently divided between BOEM and BSEE, the Department aims to:
- Improve coordination and consistency
- Reduce duplication of efforts
- Strengthen oversight and environmental safeguards
- Modernize organizational structure
All current regulatory responsibilities and protections will remain in place throughout the transition. There will be no disruption to permitting, environmental reviews, or enforcement activities.
What to Expect
- Phased Transition: Internal alignment activities begin soon.
- No Regulatory Rollbacks: Existing requirements remain in full effect.
- New Website and Branding: The Marine Minerals Administration’s full digital presence will launch in the coming months.
- This page will be updated regularly
Posted in energy policy, Offshore Energy - General, Regulation | Tagged BOEM, Department of the Interior, BSEE, Marine Minerals Administration, consolidation, transition | Leave a Comment »
United Oil & Gas commented on the results from their recent piston coring program. Excerpts follow:
“United has undertaken a geochemical analysis on the 42 piston cores acquired across the Walton-Morant Licence. The analysis has identified C4 and C5 hydrocarbons, including butanes and pentanes, in select piston cores within the headspace gas dataset. United note that these higher order hydrocarbons are not typically associated with biogenic gas systems and are therefore consistent with a potential thermogenic contribution. (This is true.)
There is an established body of evidence for an active petroleum system in Jamaica in general, and on the licence in particular, including repeat satellite slick anomalies, thermogenic hydrocarbon geochemistry from existing onshore and offshore wells, onshore and offshore oil seeps, and onshore surface outcrops. Furthermore, petroleum systems modelling suggests the presence of oil-mature source rocks. The 2026 SGE survey is the first on the licence to be optimally positioned using 3D seismic, multibeam echosounder (MBES) seabed mapping, and satellite-derived slick anomaly data. Taken together, the data are interpreted as consistent with an active petroleum system offshore Jamaica.“
United estimates that the piston coring results boost the Geological Chance of Success (i.e. the source rock, reservoir, trap, and seal—are present and working) for the flagship Colibri prospect from 19% to 32%, which is quite good for frontier exploration.
Will these new data help entice majors to fund exploratory drilling? In the video below (ignore the click-bait title cover 😉), Energy Minister Daryl Vaz does a good job of adding perspective.
Posted in Jamaica, Offshore Energy - General | Tagged Daryl Vaz, Energy Minister, geochemical survey, Jamaica, partner search, petroleum system, piston coring, probability of success, United Oil and Gas, Walton Morant License | Leave a Comment »
The Dept. of the Interior (DOI) has announced wind lease buyback agreements with Bluepoint Wind and Golden State Wind.
These are mutually beneficial “Win-Win” agreements. Bluepoint and Golden State benefit by escaping bad business decisions:
- Bluepoint massively overpaid ($765 million) for Atlantic lease 0537 during the brief irrational exuberance era of the offshore wind program. The intense bidding was driven by the lure of subsidies, guaranteed power sales, unprecedented Federal and State promotion, peak climate activism, inattention to mounting public opposition, and irrational expectations regarding the role of offshore wind in powering the economy.
- The value of Atlantic wind leases declined by 99.4% between 2022 and 2024, and this was before the Presidential election!
- The New Jersey Board of Public Utilities has moved to terminate a $1 billion agreement to develop infrastructure to bring power from offshore wind farms to the grid.
- Golden State bid $150 million for a wind lease that will require floating turbines. The 50 MW Kincardine Offshore Windfarm, which is billed as the “world’s largest floating wind farm,” experienced a £30 million loss in 2023 following a £18 million loss in 2022. Another floating wind project, Hywind Scotland, had to be taken offline for 4 months for maintenance after less than 6 years of operation. BOEM was forced to “postpone” the Oregon wind sale given the absence of bidders.
- Significant work had not yet begun on either the Bluepoint or Golden State projects.
- Many in Morro Bay and elsewhere along the Central Coast of California are not pleased with the attempt to “industrialize the coast.” Opposition to offshore wind projects is now well established along the Atlantic Coast.
- Even in Europe, the value of offshore wind leases has diminished. A Dec. 2024 Danish offering received no bids. See this explanation.
- The companies get to invest their inflated wind dollars in profitable energy projects without penalty. What prudent executive wouldn’t jump at the deal?
- Waiting for the next Administration is not likely to improve the fundamental economics of offshore wind development, and increased subsidies are not popular.
- A pro-wind govt would facilitate permitting, but is unlikely to buyback existing leases.
The Administration also benefits:
- Two more wind leases are off the books.
- Removing one of three leases could significantly affect the economics of Central Coast (CA) wind development.
- Agreements were necessary because it’s difficult to cancel leases, and compensation would be required. If settled in court, the compensation could easily exceed the lease purchase price.
- The companies agreed not to pursue any new offshore wind projects in the United States.
- The rebates will be invested in projects favored by the Administration.
Question: Are the partners and parent companies also precluded from investing in offshore wind projects or just the Bluepoint Wind and Golden State Wind entities? If BlackRock, EDP, and Engie can no longer make such investments, that is a big deal. This is especially true given the agreement with Total, Vineyard Wind’s problems, Orsted’s financial challenges, BP and Shell’s apparent exit from the US offshore wind market, and Equinor’s reduced renewable energy ambitions.
Finally, a December 7, 2022 release by the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board heralding the 50% partnership in Golden State Wind might be of interest to our Canadian readers. That bad investment can now be removed from the books.
Posted in energy policy, Offshore Wind | Tagged BlackRock, Bluepoint Wind, buyback, Canada Pension Plan Investment Board, floating turbines, Golden State Wind, US Dept. of the Interior, win-win agreements, wind leases | Leave a Comment »
Bud's Offshore Energy (BOE) 
API requests an extension of the comment period for BOEM’s proposed financial assurance rule
May 7, 2026 by offshoreenergy
API’s letter is attached. Key points:
In API’s favor:
On the other hand:
Comments:
Posted in decommissioning, energy policy, Regulation | Tagged API, decommissioning, extension of comment period, financial assurance, request to BOEM | Leave a Comment »