Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘UK’ Category

Piper Alpha Memorial Garden, Aberdeen, Scotland
Scottish Hazards

In terms of the total number of fatalities, the Piper Alpha fire was the worst disaster in the history of offshore oil and gas operations and sent shock waves around the world. Eight months later another interactive pipeline-platform fire killed 7 workers at the South Pass 60 “B” facility in the Gulf of Mexico. A US Minerals Management Service task group reviewed the investigation reports for both fires and recommended regulatory changes with regard to:

  1. the identification and notification procedures for out-of-service safety devices and systems,
  2. location and protection of pipeline risers,
  3. diesel and helicopter fuel storage areas and tanks,
  4. approval of pipeline repairs, and
  5. location of ESD valves on pipelines.

Paul Schneider and I wrote a paper on the task group’s findings and that paper was published in Offshore Operations Post Piper Alpha (Institute of Marine Engineers,1991). The proposed regulations that followed summarized these findings and can be be found at this Federal Register link.

Lord Cullen’s comprehensive inquiry into the Piper Alpha tragedy challenged traditional thinking about regulation and how safety objectives could best be achieved, and was perhaps the most important report in the history of offshore oil and gas operations. Per Cullen:

Many current safety regulations are unduly restrictive because they impose solutions rather than objectives. They also are out of date in relation to technological advances. Guidance notes lend themselves to interpretations that discourage alternatives. There is a danger that compliance takes precedence over wider safety considerations and that sound innovations are discouraged.

Cullen advocated management systems that describe the safety objectives, the system by which those objectives were to be achieved, the performance standards to be met, and the means by which adherence to those standards was to be monitored. He called for safety cases that describe major hazards on an installation and provide appropriate safety measures. Per Cullen, each operator should be required in the safety case to demonstrate that the safety management systems of the company and the installation are adequate to assure that design and operation of the platform and its equipment are safe.

Links for the full Piper Alpha Inquiry: volume 1 and volume 2

Read Full Post »

The International Regulators’ Forum (IRF) does a good job of compiling safety performance data for offshore oil and gas operations in member countries. Because these data are collected by the respective regulators and compiled in accordance with established guidelines, we consider the IRF compilations to be the most credible international incident summary data for the offshore industry.

BOE looked at the numbers for the IRF countries with the highest level of activity in terms of hours worked – Brazil, Norway, UK, and US. These countries accounted for 90% of the total hours worked in 2020, the last year for which data are available. The 2020 hours worked (millions) were also relatively similar for the 4 countries: Norway – 41.2, UK – 42.4, US – 50.4, Brazil – 50.7. The differences in hours worked were somewhat greater in the prior years, but not dramatically so.

We charted the fatality and lost-time (>3 days) data (below). Our intent at this point is to draw attention to the IRF data sets, not to assess and compare performance. We do think the overall safety performance in these and other IRF countries, while far from perfect, is quite good given the hundreds of millions of hours worked, complexity of operations, logistical challenges, and difficult operating environments. We recommend that the IRF prioritize the timely posting of these data, and begin providing causation information so that companies and other interested parties can better identify performance issues and safety trends.

Read Full Post »

  • While the text of the announcement implies otherwise, the new name prioritizes the “transition” over concerns about energy supply, security, and reliability. In that regard, the timing seems questionable.
  • Why not the North Sea Energy Authority (NSEA) or UK Offshore Energy Authority (UKOEA)?
  • Will OPEC+ be impressed? Perhaps China will add a few coal-fired power plants in honor of the name change.
  • Dan Yergin understands that energy transitions are complicated. Quoting Yergin’s outstanding article in the Atlantic:

The term energy transition somehow sounds like it is a well-lubricated slide from one reality to another. In fact, it will be far more complex: Throughout history, energy transitions have been difficult, and this one is even more challenging than any previous shift.

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.

Read Full Post »

On Sunday, the Norwegian government announced that its sovereign wealth fund, the world’s largest, wwould divest its Russian assets, worth around 25 billion Norwegian crowns ($2.80 billion).

Reuters

“In the current situation, we regard our position as untenable,” Equinor Chief Executive Anders Opedal said in a statement. “We will now stop new investments into our Russian business, and we will start the process of exiting our joint ventures in a manner that is consistent with our values.”

Reuters

British oil giant BP said Sunday that it is “exiting” its $14 billion stake in Russian oil giant Rosneft over Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine in one of the biggest signs yet that the Western business world is cutting ties over the Kremlin’s invasion of Ukraine.

Washington Post

Read Full Post »

Britain sees a “good, solid” future for the North Sea’s oil and gas industry and will issue new licences to expand output in the future, Energy Minister Greg Hands said on Tuesday.

“We need continued investment into the North Sea,” Hands told the International Energy Week online conference.

Reuters

Meanwhile, the US government seems intent on supporting legal and administrative actions that stymie offshore exploration and development. The US is sanctioning its own offshore industry during an international crisis centered around energy.

2021 was the first year in the history of the US offshore program dating back to the passage of the OCS Lands Act in 1953 without a single oil and gas sale, and there is no lease sale on the horizon. Most years have had multiple sales, regardless of the party in power. The only attempted 2021 sale (no. 257) was required by a Federal Court decision in Louisiana. That sale was annulled by a questionable DC court decision that the Federal government chose not to appeal.

Read Full Post »

Oil and gas workers’ union, Unite Scotland, has demanded intervention by the Scottish government in response to Canadian Natural Resources (CNR) International introducing mandatory vaccinations, calling these measures “draconian.”

offshore-energy.biz

As previously reported, a Norwegian union criticized the absence of consultation before Aker BP imposed vaccine requirements at their facilities.

Read Full Post »

By the end of 2022, Germany will have switched off its last 8.1 GW of nuclear power. Another 6.4 GW of coal capacity are scheduled for shuttering by 2023. Recent events and publications have given ammunition to those who fear a collapse of the system.

In 2018, Germany’s influential energy industry association BDEW said that Germany would run into a “shortfall in secured capacity by 2023 at the latest”, and that the country shouldn’t rely on its neighbors to make up the difference. Three years later and a lot closer to the nuclear phase-outBDEW head Kerstin Andreae says: “For a secure energy supply, we also need new gas-fired power plants, as this is the only way to obtain the required controllable power.”

Clean Energy Wire

Germany will need back-up and supplemental power from gas plants, but the EU has excluded gas-fired energy generation from the list of sustainable investments and the associated incentives. Per Kerstin Andreae of the BDEW:

“We need to build these new power plant capacities now. Although they will initially run on natural gas, they are already capable of using hydrogen as an energy source in the future and will thus ultimately become climate neutral,” she said. But without a clear decision from the Commission „ important energy transition investments are at risk”

Clean Energy Wire

Meanwhile, oilprice.com reports that “UK peak-hour power prices for Monday evening through 6 p.m. surged to the highest level in a month due to low wind power generation during the weekend.” In what is becoming a familiar story:

Coal closures and no immediate replacements for nuclear power have exposed the UK’s vulnerabilities to the whims of the weather, with cold winters stoking natural gas demand and still weather lowering wind power generation.

oilprice.com

Daniel Yergin reminded us that energy transitions take time. Countries that ignore those realities are likely to suffer the consequences, both economically and environmentally. Per Aissatou Sophie Gladima, the energy minister of Senegal:

Restricting lending for oil and gas development, she said, “is like removing the ladder and asking us to jump or fly.”

Read Full Post »

link

Conceptually, these projects have great promise. To date, the main challenges have been durability, mooring system integrity, and space preemption. As noted in the Post article:

The idea is simple; execution less so. As these devices — and their computers, turbines and hydraulics — must survive in some of the harshest conditions on Earth.

Read Full Post »

Greenpeace climate activists stage a protest at a Shell refinery in Rotterdam, Netherlands
EuroNewa.green

Oil firms have been banned from taking an active role in the upcoming COP26 summit.

The news is a seismic victory for climate activists.

It stops Big Oil companies from sponsoring the conference and steering the narrative away from their culpability in the climate crisis.

Euronews.green

Comments:

  • This decision is more about exercising political power than advancing our energy future, which is dependent on collaboration among all sectors of the energy industry.
  • Oil and gas producers are “banned,” but major energy consumers are welcome to support the conference.
  • The 3 oil companies mentioned in the article are major investors in offshore wind and other renewable energy projects. These companies have spent hundreds of millions of dollars to purchase US offshore wind leases and will spend much more on the projects that follow. They are also major investors in low carbon intensity offshore oil and gas production.
  • Does the US government, which (at taxpayers expense) is sending a very large delegation to COP26, support this type of discriminatory behavior toward major contributors to our economy?
  • While the delegates are attending the conference, the folks at home are seething about gasoline prices and inflation.

Read Full Post »

A Maersk Oil-owned FPSO which was damaged during heavy storms in the North Sea in February will be out of action for another year as it heads for drydock repairs. Upstream

More on the Gryphon Alpha incident.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »