Kathryn Porter is a well informed and articulate energy consultant. This video linked below is highly recommended.
Posted in climate, energy policy, UK | Tagged decarbonization, expensive renewables, financial costs, Kathryn Porter, UK | Leave a Comment »
In 1904 the famous “Old Maud” well (pictured) in Orcutt, Santa Barbara County, produced a million barrels in the first 100 days.
This week, the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors voted 3-1 to establish a framework to prohibit new oil and gas operations and phase out existing operations.
Given the industry’s long history in the County, one would have expected consultation with the remaining companies prior to that decision.
County staff informed Supervisor Bob Nelson, who voted against the ordinance, that they had not reached out to oil companies. Nelson described the ordinance as the nuclear option.
Charles Katherman, who started his own company in Santa Barbara 40 years ago, criticized the county for a lack of communication leading up to the ordinance. “What you’re proposing or looking at to vote on is a euthanasia of my industry,” Katherman said.
When John Smith told me about the County’s decision, I wondered what the late Darwin Sainz would think. Darwin was a proud 8th generation Californian, a well known rancher and oil industry veteran, a community leader, and Citizen of the Year in the Santa Maria Valley. His grandfather worked on the famous Old Maud well. Darwin was effective at reaching out to parties with opposing views and promoting dialogue and compromise. Sadly, reasoned dialogue no longer seems to be an option.
Posted in California, energy policy | Tagged Charles Katerman, Darwin Sainz, oil industry dismissed, Old Maud, Santa Maria, Supervisor Bob Nelson | Leave a Comment »
JL Daeschler comments that after crucifying the North Sea oil workers who saved the country in the 1970’s, the perpetrators are calling for £1.9 billion in emergency funding to help their victims transition to green energy jobs. How noble of them! How much of the funding will be provided by those responsible for the industry’s premature death? 😡
Times columnist Gillian Blowditch got it right:
“It is difficult to imagine a world in which it makes sense to import oil and gas but not produce it, while forcing our skilled workforce to work offshore in far flung corners of the globe, especially when we are importing from Norway, which is extracting oil and gas from the same seabed for which we are refusing to grant licences.”
How many jobs are being created by government-driven energy transitions that seem to be moving in reverse? Where are those jobs?
Posted in energy policy, UK | Tagged Aberdeen, emergency funding, energy transition, loss of jobs, oil capital, training workers | Leave a Comment »
Firstly, BOE applauds NOPSEMA for being the only offshore safety regulator to publish a newsletter on a regular basis.
Their latest issue identifies and explains their five National Priorities. These priorities could apply worldwide:
- Structural integrity – Ensuring offshore assets remain safe and well maintained.
- Addressing redundant wells – Strengthening oversight to ensure wells are decommissioned responsibly.
- Psychosocial health – Protection of worker mental health and well being.
- Control of work – Promoting effective systems to ensure work is carried out safely and we learn from incidents to continually improve.
- Leadership and management – Sharing how decision-making impacts safety and environmental outcomes on offshore facilities
I also strongly support their commitment to investigating non-work related fatalities at offshore facilities. These incidents should not simply be classified as non-occupational with no further explanation. NOPSEMA’s investigation of these fatalities involves the following steps:
- Identify the circumstances of the reported death.
- Assess the immediate response to the reported death.
- Identify any work related causal factors present prior to the reported death.
- Identify the cause of death as provided by the relevant Coroner or medical practitioner
Lastly, I like the name of their newsletter, which shows pride in being an offshore safety regulator. Safety regulators facilitate offshore energy development by identifying and mitigating safety and environmental risks. With few exceptions, they perform their legislatively mandated duties effectively and efficiently. I’m proud to have been an offshore safety regulator for many years.
Posted in Australia, NOPSEMA, Offshore Energy - General | Tagged Georges Bank Monitor, non-occupational fatalities, NOPSEMA, offshore safety, priorities, The Regulator | Leave a Comment »
A good Nick Welsh, Santa Barbara Independent article has been brought to my attention by John Smith. Bonus points for the baseball analogy:
“In baseball, ties famously go to the baserunner, but in county government it’s forced a legal fight in the courts.”
“The oil company Sable Offshore is insisting that when the County Board of Supervisors voted 2-2 on whether or not to allow another oil company, Exxon, to transfer its permits to Sable, the tie goes to Sable.”
“Accordingly, Sable — much in the limelight recently — just filed a lawsuit against the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors in federal court to make that point. Joining Sable in this dispute is ExxonMobil, the oil giant that sold Sable its three offshore platforms, its 120-mile pipeline, and its onshore oil storage and processing facilities known as the Santa Ynez Unit two years ago.”
Because the Planning Commission had voted 3-1 to allow the transfer, Sable argues that the 2-2 Supervisors vote upholds the Planning Commission decision.
Never a dull moment in the Santa Ynez Unit restart doneybrook. More on the tie vote here and here.
Posted in California, Offshore Energy - General, Regulation | Tagged Exxon, litigation, Sable Offshore, Santa Barbara County, Santa Ynez Unit, tie vote | Leave a Comment »
Protect Our Coast NJ petitions EPA to withdraw permit allowing Sunrise Wind to use open loop cooling
Protect Our Coast NJ submitted a petition (attached) on May 12, 2025 requesting EPA to withdraw a permit that would allow the Sunrise Wind to use an open loop cooling system. The gist of the filing:
“Sunrise Wind has obtained an EPA permit to pull nearly 8 million gallons per day (MGD) of seawater from the Atlantic Ocean and discharge it, after use in cooling and mixture with sodium hypochlorite (chlorine), back into the environment at elevated temperatures. This open-loop system was authorized by EPA Region 1 under NPDES Permit MA0004940. However, approval of this method ignores EPA’s Best Technology Available (BTA) requirement and no rigorous alternatives analysis was conducted to justify this method over a closed-cycle cooling system, despite the known and broad negative environmental impacts that will result, including harms to early life stages of marine species.
The facility lies within a biologically rich and economically vital region of southern New England and the New York Bight. NMFS and BOEM have acknowledged this area as essential fish habitat (EFH) for numerous federally managed species, including Atlantic cod, winter flounder, and longfin squid.“
Posted in Offshore Wind, Regulation | Tagged EPA, HVDC cooling systems, Protect Our Coast NJ, Sunrise Wind | Leave a Comment »
John Smith reports that Sable has cleared another significant hurdle in its attempt to restart production in the Santa Ynez Unit. The California DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION has determined that no permit is required for the pipeline anomaly digs in Gaviota State Park (see attached).
The reasons for the exemption are that the project consists of repairs to an existing facility with no expansion of use, and the footprint of the pipeline remains the same.
Maybe the SYU restart is not Mission Impossible after all.
Posted in California, Offshore Energy - General, Regulation | Tagged California Dept of Parks, exemption notice, Gaviota State Park, pipeline repairs, production restart, Sable Offshore, Santa Ynez Unit | Leave a Comment »
Our Scottish contributor, JL Daeschler, brought this brilliant Sunday Times piece by Gillian Blowditch (pictured) to my attention. A few excerpts follow, but I recommend that you read the entire column.
“I’m writing this column from Applecross in the Scottish Highlands, where the view from the window is of the Cuillins. These immutable behemoths squat beneath an expanse of sky in which the light is invariably diffuse. It never gets old.” (I second that emotion!)
“Renewables are a vital part of our energy mix, but they require gas-fired back-ups. Yet, instead of tapping into our North Sea reserves, we’re committed to importing foreign gas. It’s not just an issue around energy security and cost, it affects our trade deficit and competitiveness against countries using cheaper, home-grown supplies. It increases our dependence on foreign supply chains.”
“Meanwhile, we risk losing the valuable skills and expertise we have built up over 50 years of North Sea exploration. We are all paying the price for this obsession through higher energy bills and job losses.”
“It is difficult to imagine a world in which it makes sense to import oil and gas but not produce it, while forcing our skilled workforce to work offshore in far flung corners of the globe, especially when we are importing from Norway, which is extracting oil and gas from the same seabed for which we are refusing to grant licences.”
“According to a Survation poll commissioned by the Aberdeen & Grampian Chamber of Commerce and published last week, 68 per cent of voters want the country’s demand for oil and gas to be produced domestically, rather than imported.”
“We all want to protect our environment and Scotland, with its vast natural resources and expertise in energy, should be leading the way. Instead, we have squandered an opportunity in favour of a facile show of moral posturing.”
Posted in energy policy, UK | Tagged energy, energy policy, gas production, green agenda, news, North Sea gas, politics, Scotland, travel | Leave a Comment »
One nodule contains high grades of four key metals, meaning that four times less ore needs to be processed to obtain the same amount of metal. Nodules also contain no toxic levels of heavy elements, and the entirety of a nodule can be used, making near-zero-solid-waste production possible. Because nodules sit unattached on top of the seafloor, they will not require drilling or blasting for retrieval.
It’s time to move ahead with deep sea mining in both international and US territorial waters. As we did for frontier exploratory oil and gas drilling in Alaska and the Atlantic, I recommend comprehensive oversight including full time onboard inspectors during the initial operations and a carefully designed environmental monitoring program.
This deep sea mining commentary by Mars Lewis was brought to my attention by John Smith. Good read:
🇺🇸🚢 ⛏️ We’re witnessing a wave of glorified pseudoscience and fantasy activism around the ocean floor—this idea that the deep sea is some mystical sanctuary of life and that any attempt to extract resources from it is an unforgivable sin against Gaia. Spare me.
The bottom of the ocean is not the Garden of Eden. It’s a black, silent, high-pressure wasteland—largely lifeless, uninhabitable, and filled with the very minerals we need to break free from Chinese supply chain domination. You want a clean energy future? Then stop whining about the only scalable path to get there.
China has already begun strip-mining the ocean floor without asking for your permission. They don’t care about the blobfish or the bacteria colonies around volcanic vents. They care about winning. And every time we moralize ourselves into inaction, we gift them another geopolitical advantage wrapped in Western guilt.
Let’s cut the delusion. There is no future where America stays on top without securing its own critical minerals. Recycling won’t save us. Wind and solar need metals. Batteries need rare earths. Data centers need semiconductors. And semiconductors need the materials sitting at the bottom of the ocean.
You don’t get to demand green tech, reject land mining, block seabed access, and still pretend you’re “saving the planet.” That’s not leadership. That’s learned helplessness.
So yes, I support Trump’s executive action. Because someone has to make the grown-up decision. Either we lead this resource race with responsibility and strength—or we watch tyrants carve up the planet while we post crying-face emojis and argue about what’s sacred 10,000 feet below sea level.
Let the race for the bottom begin. 🇺🇸🚢
Deep sea vs. land mining:
Posted in deep sea mining, energy policy | Tagged deep sea mining, land vs. deep sea impacts, Mars Lewis, monitoring, oversight, polymetallic nodules | Leave a Comment »
Posted in accidents, Wind Energy | Tagged falling turbine blade, fatality, Japan | Leave a Comment »
Bud's Offshore Energy (BOE) 