Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘climate’ Category

Pictured: pig for cleaning gas pipelines. Will Nord Stream’s suit against the insurers unplug investigation findings?

Nord Stream AG has sued insurers Lloyds and Arch in the English High Court for failing to pay for pipeline damage incurred during the Sept. 2022 Baltic Sea explosions. The estimated pipeline repair costs range from €1.2 to €1.35 billion, and Nord Stream is seeking €400 million from the insurers.

Could this litigation help us learn more about the findings of the official Nord Stream investigations? After 17 months of investigation, Denmark recently concluded that “there are not sufficient grounds to pursue a criminal case in Denmark.” Only nineteen days before Sweden had announced that “Swedish jurisdiction does not apply and that the investigation therefore should be closed.” These weak announcements at the end of lengthy investigations seem too convenient, and may lend credence to Hersh’s Nord Stream account or a recent variation that implicates the UK. Germany is presumably still investigating, and it remains to be seen whether they will release findings.

Could the parties in the Nord Stream case pursue documents or testimony from the Swedish, Danish, or German investigation teams? Both sides in this case, Nord Stream AG and the insurers, would benefit from details that could help identify the responsible parties.

It’s more than a little hypocritical for Western governments and their NGO partners to rail against offshore oil and gas operations while quietly accepting (without investigation) the economic and environmental consequences of the Nord Stream sabotage. Compare the Nord Stream methane emissions with those associated with Gulf of Mexico operations.

Read Full Post »

Bayou Bend CCS LLC commenced drilling an offshore (Texas State waters) and an onshore stratigraphic well for carbon sequestration in the first quarter 2024.

Talos

Is offshore carbon disposal ocean dumping? One of the provisions that was slipped into the “2021 Infrastructure Bill” exempted carbon sequestration from the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (Ocean Dumping Act). This exemption revises the OCS Lands Act and thus does not apply to State offshore lands. The Texas offshore wells must therefore be permitted by EPA as “Class VI wells,” as is the case for onshore disposal wells. However, Texas and Louisiana have asked the EPA for “primacy,” which would allow state agencies to approve and oversee these operations.

Meanwhile, the regulations for carbon disposal on the OCS, which the Infrastructure Bill mandated by November 2022, have yet to be published for comment. The latest Federal regulatory agenda indicates a publication date of 12/00/2023 for these regulations. Presumably the staff work has been completed and the rule is stalled in the review process.

Despite the absence of a regulatory framework, BOEM has accepted sequestration bids at the last three oil and gas lease sales. These bids were evaluated as if the leases were being acquired for oil and gas exploration and production, even though the bidders’ intentions were widely known. Why was BOEM a willing participant in this charade, not just at one sale, but at three sales in succession?

Given that the perceived carbon disposal bonanza is dependent on mandates and subsidies, one has to wonder about the massive revenue projections for this industry and raise concerns about the associated public and private financial risks. What is the long term business plan for this industry? Who will be monitoring the offshore wells (in perpetuity)? How will the public be protected from financial assurance and leakage risks? We will see how the myriad of carbon sequestration issues are addressed in the proposed regulations.

Read Full Post »

Given the intermittency, space preemption, aesthetic, and wildlife issues associated with wind and solar power, more attention has been shifting to geothermal energy. Quaise’s plan to tap ultradeep heat resources has been on our radar for several years and has been attracting private funding and a bit of media buzz.

Quaise is exciting not only because of the unlimited energy potential, but because of the fascinating gyrotron technology that vaporizes hard rock and could enable wells to be drilled to depths of 20-30 km and temperatures of >1000° C. Nabors, a leading drilling contractor, is one of the Quaise investors, and will be involved with the test drilling.

Demonstrating the gyrotron technology in the field is a big step up from doing so in the lab. Those of us in the “peanut gallery” are awaiting more definitive information on the lab tests that have been conducted to date and the important field tests, which are scheduled for this year.

Read Full Post »

Either the investigators were incompetent (unlikely) or the political pressure was too great (likely).

“The investigation has led the authorities to conclude that there was deliberate sabotage of the gas pipelines. However, the assessment is that there are not sufficient grounds to pursue a criminal case in Denmark,” a Copenhagen police statement said.

Reuters

After 17 months of investigation, that’s a pretty lame statement. Will we see their report?

The ball is now in Germany’s court. Should we expect more of the same?

Our June 2023 summary remains unchanged.

Read Full Post »

In light of the surge in art vandalism, admirers of “Rig at Sunset” have expressed concern about this priceless and symbolic masterpiece.😉

“Rig at Sunset”

Rest assured that “Rig at Sunset” is not being targeted. Climate activists believe the painting is disturbingly visionary and is thus socially important. Even those who are less appreciative of great artwork are reluctant to damage “Rig at Sunset,” fearing that their vandalism might actually improve its quality. So friends of this beloved masterpiece have nothing to fear! 😉

If you are unfamiliar with “Rig at Sunset,” here is a brief summary of the history:

“Rig at Sunset” was painted nearly 50 years ago by a US Geological Survey (USGS) employee who chose to remain anonymous. Initially, the masterpiece was presented to USGS (later MMS) engineers and scientists who had made important contributions to the offshore oil and gas program. Understandably, the intended recipients were so humbled by the magnificence of the painting that they could not accept it. As the painting grew in value and international prominence, framed copies were presented to retirees and the original painting was kept at a secure, undisclosed location.

Read Full Post »

As concerns about wind leasing mount, it is becoming increasingly apparent that the rush to hold auctions may not be in the best long-term interest of the wind program. The primary objective should be cost-effective and responsible development, not gigawatt deadlines. The administration’s vision for wind energy capacity, particularly the 15 GW goal for floating turbines by 2035, is unlikely to be achieved and rushing the process is not helpful.

The current wind program is reminiscent of James Watt’s ill-fated approach to oil and gas leasing. Watt’s “lease-everything now” agenda had the opposite effect of that which was intended, the result being that 96.3% of our offshore land is now off-limits to oil and gas leasing.

Affected parties in Oregon have not held back in voicing their displeasure with BOEM’s wind energy announcement.

BOEM wants offshore wind come hell or high water and they don’t care who they harm to get it.

Heather Mann, executive director of Midwater Trawlers Cooperative

The Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw tribal council unanimously passed a resolution opposing offshore wind energy development off the Oregon coast.

The federal government states that it has ‘engaged’ with the Tribe, but that engagement has amounted to listening to the Tribe’s concerns and ignoring them and providing promises that they may be dealt with at some later stage of the process. The Tribe will not stand by while a project is developed that causes it more harm than good – this is simply green colonialism.

Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw tribal council Chair Brad Kneaper

Read Full Post »

In the wake of the decision to “pause” LNG export approvals, it’s important for us to also pause and reflect on the natural gas revolution.

Gas now accounts for 40% of our power generation.

The gas boom’s economic and environmental benefits are compelling. Greenhouse gas emissions currently get most of the attention. In that regard, methane (CH4) is a hydrogen transporter that emits far less CO2 than other fossil fuels when burned.

Less attention has been given to natural gas’s other important air quality advantages – low NOx. SO2, and particulate emissions. These emissions have greater local significance from a human health standpoint. Those who have ridden a bike behind a natural gas powered bus have no doubt experienced the natural gas advantage firsthand.

Other environmental considerations particularly favor offshore natural gas when compared to energy alternatives. These include low well and facility density, no groundwater pollution risk, and minimal risk to wildlife.

Compiled below are links to BOE posts on natural gas issues and advantages.

Read Full Post »

The above map shows the offshore carbon disposal leases acquired by Repsol from the Texas General Land Office (GLO) and the adjacent Federal tracts Repsol bid on at OCS Lease Sale 261. There should be absolutely no confusion regarding Repsol intentions at Sale 261. They plan to develop a large CO2 disposal hub offshore Corpus Christi and bid improperly at an OCS oil and gas lease sale to support that objective.

Perhaps blinded by visions of “a stream of U.S. government grants, followed by generous tax credits for every ton of carbon stored,” Repsol (Sale 261) and Exxon (Sales 257 and 259) have made a mockery of the OCS leasing process and the regulations that guide it. The Repsol bids should be promptly rejected.

So what about the Exxon nearshore Texas leases that have already been issued? Given that Exxon misled the Federal government and improperly acquired carbon disposal leases at an oil and gas lease sale, those bids should be cancelled pursuant to 30 CFR § 556.1102:

(c) BOEM may cancel your lease if it determines that the lease was obtained by fraud or misrepresentation. You will have notice and an opportunity to be heard before BOEM cancels your lease.

While Exxon’s oil production increases in the Permian Basin and offshore Guyana are impressive, is it not hypocritical for Exxon and other major producers to capitalize on the capture and disposal of emissions associated with the consumption of their products? Is it not just a bit unsavory for oil companies to cash in on (and virtue signal about) carbon collection and disposal at the public’s expense? Perhaps companies that believe oil and gas production is harmful to society should be reducing production rather than engaging in enterprises intended to sustain it.

Read Full Post »

EIA reports October production of 1.959 million bopd. September production was revised down from 2.000 to 1.999 million bopd, a very slight but symbolically significant change. Foul play? 😉

For the past 2 years, no tropical storms have significantly impacted Gulf of Mexico production. Don’t expect this to be reported elsewhere 😉

Read Full Post »

COP28:

The United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP28) closed today with an agreement that signals the “beginning of the end” of the fossil fuel era by laying the ground for a swift, just and equitable transition, underpinned by deep emissions cuts and scaled-up finance.

UN Climate Change News, 12/13/2023

Real world:

“That intrinsic demand that is not visible is so significant that we don’t see demand peaking – I don’t think we’ll see [oil] demand peaking in our lifetimes,” he said. “Particularly as demand growth in [emerging markets] continues to surprise the upside.” 

Christyan Malek, JPMorgan’s top energy strategist

The 19th century is known as the “century of coal,” but, as the technology scholar Vaclav Smil has noted, not until the beginning of the 20th century did coal actually overtake wood as the world’s No. 1 energy source. Moreover, past energy transitions have also been “energy additions”—one source atop another. Oil, discovered in 1859, did not surpass coal as the world’s primary energy source until the 1960s, yet today the world uses almost three times as much coal as it did in the ’60s.

Dan Yergin

You be the judge.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »