Posted in energy policy, Offshore Wind, Regulation, tagged 5 suspended projects, BOEM, Offshore Wind, suspension letter on December 24, 2025| Leave a Comment »
Attached is the letter sent to operators of the 5 projects that have been suspended. The cited regulation reads as follows:
§ 585.417 When may BOEM order a suspension?
BOEM may order a suspension under the following circumstances:
(a) When necessary to comply with judicial decrees prohibiting some or all activities under your lease; or
(b) When the suspension is necessary for reasons of national security or defense.
Posted in energy policy, Offshore Wind, tagged Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind, directed suspension, Dominion Energy, energy mandates, Thomas Jefferson Institute on December 23, 2025| Leave a Comment »
Excerpts from an excellent opinion piece by Derrick Max of the Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy:
Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind (CVOW) is no ordinary renewable project. It was created by legislative command. The 2020 Virginia Clean Economy Act (VCEA) declared Dominion’s 2.6-gigawatt wind farm “in the public interest,” effectively tying the hands of the State Corporation Commission and guaranteeing Dominion full cost recovery and profit. The risk doesn’t sit with shareholders — it sits with Virginia’s ratepayers.
The Thomas Jefferson Institute opposed that structure from the start. We warned that forcing captive customers to underwrite an unproven, high-cost project located in a hurricane prone region would expose Virginians to escalating bills with little accountability. Yet when a group recently asked the federal government to shut CVOW down, we declined to join. Why? Because government shouldn’t pick winners and losers — not when it mandates projects, and not when it stops them. Especially when a project is in its final stretch and no economic analysis of such a decision has been completed (or shared).
Virginia’s offshore wind story shows how risky it is when government drives energy decisions by decree. One administration mandates a massive buildout; the next halts it over security fears. Businesses can’t plan around that. Ratepayers shouldn’t have to pay for it.
Posted in energy policy, Offshore Wind, tagged Atlantic wind, Empire Wind, leases suspended, Revolution Wind, Secretary Burgum, Sunrise Wind, Vineyard Wind, Virginia Offshore Wind on December 22, 2025| Leave a Comment »
The suspended leases are for Vineyard Wind 1, Revolution Wind, Sunrise Wind, Empire Wind, and Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind. (See the map below).These are the only Atlantic Wind projects under construction.
Given the $billions in expenditures to date and coastal State support for these projects, expect negotiated mitigations or litigation.
Posted in energy policy, Offshore Wind, tagged Atlantic wind, leases suspended, national security, Secretary Burgum on December 22, 2025| Leave a Comment »
Posted in California, energy policy, Offshore Energy - General, pipelines, Regulation, tagged California Fire Marshal, consent decree, OSFM, PHMSA, pipeline jurisdiction, Sable Offshore, Santa Ynez Unit on December 18, 2025| Leave a Comment »
The anticipated State-Federal jurisdictional battle over Sable’s Las Flores Canyon Pipeline is on! See the attached letter from the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) declaring that the pipeline is under Federal jurisdiction.
The major hurdle for PHMSA/Sable is the court approved Consent Decree that was executed following the 2015 Refugio pipeline spill. The Decree, which designates the California Fire Marshal as the sole regulator for the pipeline, is not mentioned in the PHMSA letter. Needless to say, another major legal battle looms.
Excerpt from the PHMSA letter:
PHMSA’s evaluation of the Las Flores Pipeline confirms that it transports crude oil from the OCS to an onshore processing facility at Las Flores Canyon and continues the transportation of crude oil from Las Flores Canyon to Pentland, California. Consistent with Appendix A, the Las Flores Pipeline is an interstate pipeline. As portions of the Las Flores Pipeline were previously considered to be intrastate and regulated by OSFM, PHMSA is notifying OSFM that the Las Flores Pipeline is subject to the regulatory oversight of PHMSA.
Posted in California, energy policy, Offshore Energy - General, tagged 3-1 vote, Board of Supervisors, Dec. 16 meeting, Exxon, recusal, Sable Offshore, Santa Barbara County, transfer of permits on December 16, 2025| Leave a Comment »
The vote on the transfer of Santa Ynez Unit (SYU), Pacific Offshore Pipeline Company (POPCO) Gas Plant, and Las Flores Pipeline System permits from Exxon to Sable Offshore was the last item on the Board’s agenda, so those of us who were streaming the meeting for that topic had to be patient.
The Sable session began with a surprise announcement that opened the possibility that perhaps the outcome might not be as expected. Supervisor Hartmann, who owns property close to the pipeline, had once recused herself from voting on this matter. When it was thought that her property was ~900′ from the pipeline, the Fair Political Practice Commission (FPPC) cleared her participation. However, after a 12/3/2025 letter from Sable informed that her property was as close as 8′ from the pipeline, the FPPC reversed its position and Supervisor Hartmann again recused herself.
Supervisor Hartmann’s re-recusal added some drama to the session given that there were two sure votes against Sable and one sure vote in favor. The swing vote would be that of Supervisor Lavagnino, who was very much supportive of the oil industry, but not Sable.
After strong but predictable presentations by the Environmental Defense Center/Center for Biological Diversity team and Sable, the floor was open to public comments. Although there were more speakers opposed to the Sable position (13), this observer found the Sable supporters (7) to be more compelling. Most were California natives who worked on the project and demonstrated a sincere commitment to the safety and environmental values that we all support. One aptly noted that California unnecessarily imports 2/3 of its oil from foreign sources, some of which aren’t particularly friendly.
As an aside, a County staffer pointed out that 400,000 barrels of SYU oil were in storage as a result of the resumption of production in May prior to receiving the necessary approvals to transport oil through the onshore pipeline.
The vote opened with Supervisor Nelson supporting the transfer of permits to Sable. His commented that the County was “attacking Sable’s finances at the same time they were trying to bankrupt them.”
Sable opponents held serve with Supervisors Capps and Lee opposing the transfer. Ms. Capps deserves credit for the sincere respect she showed for the Sable workers who were present.
So Supervisor Lavagnino would cast the deciding vote. He once again voted against the transfer noting that he was a long time supporter of the oil industry, but that he had lost confidence in Sable.
Bottom line: The outcome was as expected, but the recusal drama and strong presentations made the stream worth watching.
Posted in accidents, Offshore Wind, Regulation, energy policy, tagged Vineyard Wind, Nantucket, blade failure, MOU, penalties, accountability on December 16, 2025| Leave a Comment »
The attached Memorandum of Understanding between Vineyard Wind (VW) and the Town of Nantucket is long on bureaucratic procedures and short on risk mitigation and penalties.
The agreement details requirements for monthly reports, liaisons, written correspondence, plan reviews, and participation on incident management teams, but excludes any monetary penalties for past or future incidents. (With regard to penalties, should BSEE have assessed civil penalties for the 2024 turbine incident in accordance with 30 CFR § 285.400 (f)? This was a major pollution event.)
This MOU provision gives the impression that the Town is subordinate to VW:
“The Town will provide Vineyard Wind 1 up to 4 business days, if required, to identify and correct errors in the Town’s intended public communications about the Project.”
The responsible party should not be exercising oversight over the communications of an affected local government. Can you imagine Santa Barbara County reaching such an agreement with Sable Offshore?
Finally, the MOU further establishes the Town as a de facto partner in the project. VW, not the Town, is the responsible party and must be held fully accountable for project performance.
Posted in deep sea mining, energy policy, Offshore Energy - General, tagged beach nourishment, BOEM, Great Lakes Dredge Co., marine minerals, Odyssey Marine, phosphate, sand, titanium, Virginia, zirconium on December 15, 2025| Leave a Comment »
The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) has initiated the process for a potential mineral lease sale in Federal waters off Virginia. BOEM’s action is in response to a request by Odyssey Marine for a critical minerals sale.
Odyssey’s primary targets are phosphate, which is now on the critical minerals list, and rare earth element’s titanium and zirconium. This would be a shelf dredging operation, in partnership with Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Company, rather than the deepwater module collection being proposed for the Pacific.
The fact that the sand recovered during the dredging process could be used for beach nourishment should appeal to adjacent coastal communities.
Odyssey Marine’s CEO discusses the proposed Virginia offshore program starting at the 4:00 minute mark in the video below.
Posted in energy policy, Gulf of Mexico, Offshore Energy - General, tagged big beautiful Gulf of America, independents, lease sale, majors, number of bids, Sale BBG1 on December 12, 2025| Leave a Comment »
While the majors and large independents garner most of the attention, smaller companies are an integral part of the mosaic that is the Gulf of America petroleum province. Some focus on producing and identifying remaining reserves on the shelf; others partner in deepwater projects.
Sale participants like Arena, Cantium, Walter, W&T, Beacon, Kosmos, and Houston Energy are well established Gulf leaseholders. Red Willow has attracted attention as a successful Southern Ute energy corporation.
Some BBG1 participants may be lesser known:
Collective bids by category:
Posted in energy policy, Gulf of Mexico, Offshore Energy - General, tagged BOEM, Gulf of America, OCS Sale BBG1, questions answered, sale results on December 11, 2025| Leave a Comment »
See the updated comparison table in the previous BOE post.
The questions raised prior to the sale have been answered:
See the sale summary data. The top bidders list is pasted below.
Bud's Offshore Energy (BOE) 