Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Alaska’ Category

These bills probably aren’t going anywhere at this time, but would help strengthen the integrity of the US offshore program. The bills are generally consistent with the views expressed by Senators Manchin (D-WV) and Kelly (D-AZ) in a letter to the President.

  • The Unleashing American Energy Act requires a minimum of two oil and gas lease sales to be held annually in available federal waters in the Central and Western Gulf of Mexico Planning Area, and in the Alaska Region of the Outer Continental Shelf.
  • The Securing American Energy and Investing in Resiliency Act requires the Department of the Interior to conduct all remaining offshore oil and gas lease sales in the current leasing plan and issue leases won as a result of Lease Sale 257.
  • The Strategy to Secure Offshore Energy Act requires the publications of the 2022-27 plan for offshore oil and gas lease sales by the time the current plan expires on June 30, 2022.

Read Full Post »

While the Fieldwood Energy violations drove up the number of Incidents of Non-Compliance (INCs) in the Gulf of Mexico in 2021, most operating companies appear to have had good compliance records. Among companies that were subjected to at least 10 facility inspection and drilled at least one well, BHP Billiton, Eni US, and Murphy (listed alphabetically) had the most impressive compliance records. These three operators were cited for 7 or fewer INCs, none of which required a facility to be shut-in. Other operators that exceeded those activity thresholds and had excellent compliance records were (listed alphabetically) Anadarko, ANKOR Energy, Chevron, EnVen, Shell, and Walter Oil and Gas.

In the Pacific Region, Beta Operating Co., Chevron (now overseeing the former Signal Hill properties), and Exxon had excellent compliance records, although none of these facilities produced for the full year. In Alaska, Hillcorp had an excellent record at the Northstar Unit. (This is a gravel island facility in the State waters of the Beaufort Sea, but some of the wells produce from portions of the reservoir that are in the Federal sector).

Unfortunately, only summary inspection data are posted online. Without knowing the specific violations and circumstances, it’s not possible to fully assess the risk exposure. These oil and gas operations are conducted on public lands and are monitored by Federal employees. Inspection data and reports should be publicly accessible without having to submit Freedom of Information Act requests.

As has previously been discussed, incident updates should also be posted in a timely manner. Reference is made to this important recommendation in the 2016 National Academies report entitled Strengthening the Safety Culture of the Offshore Oil and Gas Industry:

Recommendation 4.2.2: Because accident, incident, and inspection data all are needed to identify and understand safety risks and corrective actions, the committee recommends full transparency such that regulators make all these data readily available to the public in a timely way, taking into consideration applicable confidentiality requirements.

Read Full Post »

In the early 1990’s, Department of the Interior (DOI) and Department of Energy (DOE) leadership dabbled at re-branding the OCS Oil and Gas Program by reversing the order of the words. Clever? Perhaps by Washington public relations standards. One senior manager even changed his license plate from “OCS OIL” to “MMS GAS” (not much competition for those tags 😃). Technical staff were less enthused about this simplistic marketing gimmick that misrepresented the historical and scientific facts about oil and gas production. For many years, natural gas was a byproduct of oil production that was commonly flared. (This practice continues in some regions of the world, although to a lesser extent than in the past.)

Understandably, the Oil and Gas Journal wasn’t very impressed by the change. I saved a copy of their 1/24/1994 editorial (attached) on the subject. Per the OGJ:

We at the Journal love natural gas. But that doesn’t warrant an attempt to repeal the laws of nature and ignore the weight of tradition by renaming everything “gas and oil” this and that.

John L. Kennedy, Editor, Oil and Gas Journal, 1/24/1994)

To their credit, BOEM and BSEE web pages and announcements during recent administrations (both parties) indicate a preference for the more traditional “oil and gas.” (The DOE website largely ignores the existence of either oil or natural gas.) Surprisingly, the American Petroleum Institute (API), an industry trade organization with more than 100 years of history, is now consistently using “natural gas and oil.” This rearrangement of words is not entirely consistent with the interest of API’s members. In the offshore sector, the primary interest of API members is in finding and producing oil. if you think otherwise, look at the EIA GoM gas production data. Most of the Gulf’s declining gas production is now associated with deepwater oil production, and BSEE rightfully requires that this gas be used for fuel or transported for sale. Similarly, gas is a secondary consideration for API members exploring in Alaska given that 35 trillion cu ft of North Slope gas still awaits a pipeline.

Oil companies, and those who represent them, should be proud of their current and historical role in producing oil (and gas) for our economy, security, and way of life; and of the men and women who have toiled to locate and produce petroleum resources for the benefit of society. Are there better energy alternatives? Perhaps, but issues with these alternatives remain to be resolved, and oil and gas will continue to be important. Let’s focus on producing these resources as safely, cleanly, and reliably as possible.

Read Full Post »

Positive measures announced by President Obama during today’s radio address:

  1. Hold a Gulf of Mexico lease sale this year and two next year
  2. Extend Gulf of Mexico and Alaska leases where drilling activity was suspended after the blowout
  3. Accelerate pre-sale seismic surveys in the Mid- and South Atlantic
  4. Conduct annual lease sales in Alaska’s National Petroleum Reserve

Read Full Post »

Anchorage Daily News:

The federal Environmental Appeals Board, which is part of the EPA, reviewed the permits. It found last week that the analysis of the impact of nitrogen dioxide emissions from the ships on Alaska Native communities was too limited, and remanded the permits so that problems cited by the board could be fixed by the agency.

The closest proposed drill site is 60 miles off shore and about 80 miles from Wainwright, an Inupiat Eskimo village 710 miles northwest of Anchorage.

Read Full Post »

Shell’s submission to the BOEMRE provides more details on discharge plans for their Beaufort Sea exploratory drilling, and confirms that all muds and cuttings generated in drilling below the 20″ casing will be transported out of the Beaufort for disposal.  Shell also plans to transport gray water and sanitary wastes, bilge, and ballast water to approved discharge sites. This is about as close as you can get to true “zero discharge” when conducting exploratory drilling from a floating drilling unit.


Read Full Post »

Shell has agreed to transport its used drilling fluids from Beaufort Sea exploration drilling out of the Arctic if the company finally gets government permission to drill a well next summer. Alaska Journal of Commerce

I assume this includes all drilling fluids and drilled solids (cuttings) except for the spud mud and cuttings generated prior to installing the riser?  If so, I believe this will be a first for an exploratory well drilled from a floating rig in US offshore waters.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts