Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Offshore Energy – General’ Category

Six years of ONRR GoM flaring data summarized below

Posted in climate, energy policy, flaring and venting, gas, Gulf of Mexico, Offshore Energy - General, tagged , , , , on November 3, 2022| Leave a Comment »

Gulf of Mexico flaring and venting data have been sorted for the years 2015-2021. The reporting of these data is mandatory and strictly enforced, so these ONRR numbers should be accurate.

Biggest surprise: The biggest surprise is that there were no big surprises in the data. The % of gas flared and vented were generally consistent with expectations based on familiarity with historical data.

Biggest disappointment: the continued sharp decline in nonassociated (gas-well) gas production. GoM gas well gas production exceeded 4 tcf annually in the 1990s and was still above one tcf ten years ago. Since then, GWG production has declined by 80%. Nonassociated offshore natural gas has important environmental advantages, so the decline in production should be a major concern to policy makers

Encouraging sign: The % of oil-well gas vented has ticked down over the past 2 years which is encouraging from a GHG standpoint. This is presumably because most associated gas is produced on modern deepwater facilities equipped with flare booms. An astute politician would be rushing to take credit for this achievement.😀

Unfavorable ratio: Although the volumes are low (<1 Bcf combined in 2021), more gas-well gas was vented each year than flared. This is presumably because older shelf facilities without flare booms still produce much of the natural gas.

Abbreviations:

  • ONRR: Office of Natural Resources Revenue
  • GoM: Federal waters of the Gulf of Mexico
  • OWGP: oil-well gas production
  • GWGP: gas-well gas production
  • OWGF: oil-well gas flared
  • OWGV: oil-well gas vented
  • GWGF: gas-well gas flared
  • GWGV: gas-well gas vented

Read Full Post »

Gulf of Mexico production remains stable; BOEM forecast misses the mark

Posted in energy policy, Gulf of Mexico, Offshore Energy - General, tagged , , , on November 2, 2022| Leave a Comment »

BOEM’s 2022 production forecast, which was just published in July, was 1.9 million BOPD, and will likely be a full 10% too high for the year. One has to assume that the staff work was completed well before the document was actually published. Of greater concern, BOEM’s longer term production forecast, along with unrealistic expectations for the “transition,” were used to justify a subminimal 5 year leasing plan with the fewest sales in history.

Read Full Post »

On Halloween: spooked by US energy policy – all tricks, no treats

Posted in energy policy, Offshore Energy - General, Uncategorized, tagged , , , on October 31, 2022| Leave a Comment »

More Halloween horror reported by our friends in Wyoming:

The supply of diesel in the United States has dropped to its lowest seasonal level since 1945, according to federal data, meaning there’s less than a month of the fuel stockpiled in the country. 

Read Full Post »

Will the Russian Nord Stream investigation be the first to be released?

Posted in accidents, Offshore Energy - General, pipelines, Russia, tagged , , , on October 27, 2022| Leave a Comment »

It looks like it might be.

Nord Stream AG, or the operator of Nord Stream 1 pipeline, sent a specially equipped vessel on Thursday to investigate damage to the pipelines under the Baltic Sea.

Nord Stream AG, whose majority shareholder is Russia’s state energy giant Gazprom, said the chartered vessel arrived at the location of damage in Sweden’s exclusive economic zone. 

The vessel, bearing the Russian flag, would have specialists aboard to assess the damage within a day and investigation would take three to five days, the company said.

Nord Stream AG said it didn’t have relevant permits to conduct an investigation until now.

DW

That’s a fast investigation!

Read Full Post »

While we are looking at GoM methane releases…

Posted in climate, gas, Gulf of Mexico, natural gas, Offshore Energy - General, tagged , , , on October 27, 2022| Leave a Comment »

NASA has identified 50+ super-emitters of methane including sites in Turkmenistan (image below) that emit an estimated 111,000 pounds per hour.

 

By comparison, vented Gulf of Mexico methane emissions in 2021 totaled 1953 mmcf. This converts to 82 million pounds at atmospheric pressure and 60°F. The identified Turkmenistan sources would thus release the amount of methane in a month that all Gulf of Mexico facilities vent in a year (2021).

East of Hazar, Turkmenistan, a port city on the Caspian Sea, 12 plumes of methane stream westward. The plumes were detected by NASA’s Earth Surface Mineral Dust Source Investigation mission and some of them stretch for more than 20 miles (32 kilometers).

Read Full Post »

Gulf of Mexico flaring & venting – 2021

Posted in flaring and venting, gas, Gulf of Mexico, natural gas, Offshore Energy - General, tagged , , on October 26, 2022| Leave a Comment »

ONRR mandatory production reporting data are being sorted to assess GoM flaring and venting trends. This will help resolve inconsistencies previously identified. In the meantime, the table below summarizes the 2021 data. 1.03% of the gas produced that year was flared or vented. 0.25% of the gas production was vented.

Interestingly, more gas-well gas was vented than flared. This is presumably because older shelf facilities without flare booms still produce 25% of the gas (versus only 7% of the oil), mostly from gas wells. More to follow.

gas
production		flared (%)vented (%)flared &
vented (%)
OWG582,2045919 (1.01)1405 (0.24)7324 (1.26)
GWG209,779311 (0.15)548 (0.26)859 (0.41)
total 791,9836230 (0.79)1953 (0.25)8183 (1.03)
OWG=oil well gas; GWG=gas well gas; all volumes are in MMCF

Read Full Post »

ONRR is now posting complete flaring and venting data

Posted in flaring and venting, gas, Gulf of Mexico, tagged , , , , on October 24, 2022| Leave a Comment »

Kudos to ONRR for posting complete flaring and venting data for all oil and gas operations on US Federal and Indian lands. These data, which distinguish between oil-well gas and gas-well gas, are included in the large “Production Disposition by Month” file that can be downloaded here.

The data should give us a good read on flaring and venting trends and help resolve the inconsistencies previously identified.

Read Full Post »

NOT a shining moment for the offshore industry

Posted in decommissioning, Gulf of Mexico, Offshore Energy - General, tagged , , , on October 21, 2022| Leave a Comment »

Where is the leadership? Offshore decommissioning costs should never fall on the taxpayer. See the attached notice (excerpt below) and a previous post on this topic.

BSEE intends to execute a multi-award IDIQ Quantity Contract inclusive of a Base Year and Four (4) Option Years; however, the government reserves the right to award the IDIQ contract to a single firm. Time & Material, Labor Hour, and/or firm-fixed price task orders will be awarded for Decommissioning Services necessary to take nine (9) orphaned facilities, located in the OCS of the Gulf of Mexico, to the point of Temporary Abandonment (TA). The estimated decommissioning cost for temporary abandonment is $10,000,000 to $20,000,000.

idiq_ta_decom_pre-solicitation_notice_final_10_12_22_1Download

Read Full Post »

Programmatic EIS for Pacific OCS platform decommissioning presents 4 alternatives, none of which are workable

Posted in California, decommissioning, Offshore Energy - General, Regulation, rigs-to-reefs, tagged , , , , on October 20, 2022| Leave a Comment »

The 23 platforms in Federal waters offshore California are from 33 to 55 years old. Most are no longer producing and 8 are on terminated leases. Some of the platforms are massive structures in water depths up to 1200′ (list of platforms and map below).

BOEM’s draft programmatic EIS evaluates 4 decommissioning alternatives, none of which appear to be workable for a combination of economic, environmental, and legal reasons:

  • Alternative 1 involves the complete removal of platforms and pipelines. This alternative is cost prohibitive and environmentally unfavorable.
  • Alternatives 2 and 3 evaluate prudent and environmentally responsible partial removal options. Unfortunately, partial removal and reefing are not feasible under the California Resources Legacy Act (AB 2503). This legislation holds the donating company perpetually liable for any damages associated with the reef structure. While not assuming any liability, the State nonetheless collects 80% of the savings (reefing vs. complete removal). As a result, it’s no surprise that no company has applied to participate in the State’s program.
  • Alternative 4 calls for leaving platforms and pipelines in place after emptying tanks and flushing pipelines. This “no action” baseline alternative violates the lease agreement and 30 CFR 250.1725, and would only be permissible if an alternate use was approved for the platforms per 30 CFR Part 585.
  • The EIS, with minimal discussion and no supporting data, rules out alternate uses at any of the 23 platforms. This exclusion would seem to be premature given the win-win-win opportunities for industry, government (Federal, State, and local), and academia. These include deferred decommissioning liabilities, a wide range of research opportunities, security and defense applications, weather observation and climate studies, maritime communications support, education programs, marine seismicity studies, and hydrokinetic energy projects. With proper maintenance, platforms can continue to provide social benefits long after all wells are plugged and production equipment is removed. However, once removed, replacement costs would be prohibitive.
  • Lastly, the EIS avoids the thorny financial responsibility issues that will complicate decommissioning decisions. Note the questions raised in the “troubling case of platforms Hogan and Houchin.”
  • Those wishing to comment on the draft EIS should follow the posted instructions.

Read Full Post »

Comments on BSEE’s proposed Well Control Rule are due by Nov. 14

Posted in drilling, Offshore Energy - General, Regulation, well control incidents, tagged , , , on October 18, 2022| Leave a Comment »

Comments on BSEE’s proposed revisions to the Well Control Rule are due in 27 days (by Nov. 14). Given the fundamental importance of well control to offshore safety and pollution prevention, all interested parties are encouraged to comment. Although some of the proposed revisions are rather nuanced, the document is neither long nor complex.

My completely independent comments are being drafted and will be posted here after they have been submitted to Regulations.gov.

My comments will explain why the proposal may reduce the rigor of the BOP system performance standard and will address a related shear ram issue. The comments will also discuss the management of BOP equipment failure and other safety data, the use of independent third parties and standards development organizations, dual shear rams on surface BOP stacks, ROV intervention capabilities, and BOP test data reporting and management.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »