Swedish engineer Erik Andersson has personally investigated the September 2022 sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines. He is perhaps the most informed independent investigator of the incident and the associated legal and political drama.
Andersson provided an updated defense document filed by the pipelines’ insurers (attached) and posted his observations on X. His X comments are consolidated below.
Nord Stream insurers Lloyds & Arch just filed an amended defense document (attached) which reveals technical details confirming a fifth Nord Stream bomb, which failed to break the NS1B line, placed just 90 meters from the successful bomb on NS1 line A.
Lloyds & Arch intend to prove in court that the government of Ukraine ordered the destruction.
The insurers have access to classified information in the criminal investigation which not even the victims have had up to now.
The locations of the northern Nord Stream bombs are marked on the nautical chart (pasted below). The previously known bombs have orange markers and the new bomb we learned about in the NS vs Lloyds filing is marked red.
I (Andersson) have repeatedly said that I dismissed Seymour Hersh claim of 8 bombs after my expedition, and have assumed there were exactly four bombs. This has now been proven false, and I think that we again have to account for the possibility that there were perhaps 8 bombs, and that Sy Hersh is perhaps right in his claim that “the Americans sped back to the crime scene to remove the unexploded bombs.”
Andersson’s personal view is that it doesn’t matter much if Team USA trusted and protected the Ukrainian sailboat crew so they could place the bombs, or if they just waited for the sailboat cover operation to finish before detonating the bombs they had placed there by other means (making sure they didn’t do anything that couldn’t have been done from a sailboat).
The presence of American, Danish and Swedish warships in the area, with all their surveillance capabilities, including the underwater surveillance, makes it a very hard sell that the Ukrainians did this alone without American participation.
American warships were also present at the crime scene when it was closed off (justified by an erroneous interpretation of international law) and cleaned up by the Swedish investigation. If any materials were found which contradicted the sailboat narrative, these materials could have been removed.
It’s impossible to trust the investigations when (1) the crime scene was illegally blocked & cleaned with US military protection, (2) international investigation was blocked, and (3) the Swedish and Danish investigations were closed with a bogus justification contradicting the premise of “jurisdiction” which was used to seize control of all information in the first place. (Very interesting point about Sweden and Denmark. After 16+ months of investigation, they both punted. Sweden suddenly didn’t have jurisdiction and Denmark decided they didn’t have sufficient grounds to pursue a criminal case.)
While the Orsted acquisition does not appear to have been directed by the Norwegian government, the State’s 2/3 ownership of the company no doubt influences renewable energy targets and broader corporate strategy.
The initial market reaction to the Orsted purchase was negative (see chart below). On a day when most oil companies’ share prices rose in response to the jump in oil prices, Equinor shares opened sharply lower.
Given the absence of industry and government data on wind turbine incidents, Scotland Against Spin (SAS) has done yeoman’s work in filling the void. SAS gathers information from press reports and official releases. A PDF of the latest SAS update summary is attached. You can view their complete incident compilation (318 pages) here. Kudos to SAS for their diligence.
As good as their work has been, SAS acknowledges that their information is far from complete and may only represent the tip of the wind turbine incident iceberg. Per SAS:
In 2011, RenewableUK confirmed that there had been 1500 wind turbine incidents in the UK alone in the previous 5 years.
In July 2019, EnergyVoice reported a total of 81 cases where workers had been injured on UK windfarms since 2014. The SAS table includes only 15 of these incidents (<19%).
In February 2021, the industry publication Wind Power Engineering and Development admitted to 865 offshore accidents during 2019. SAS captured only 4 (<0.5%).
A 13 August 2018 publication by Power Technology reported 737 incidents from UK offshore windfarms during 2016 alone, with the majority occurring during operations rather than development. 44% of medical emergencies were turbine related. In comparison, only 4 UK offshore incidents are listed in the SAS data – equivalent to 0.5%.
Lars Herbst had previously reported, based on the Wind Power article cited above, that “with an estimated 700,000 blades in operation globally, there are, on average, 3,800incidents of blade failure each year.” Lars noted that the annual blade failure rate of about 0.5% translates to 1.5% of all operating wind turbines experiencing a blade failure every year, a remarkably high failure frequency.
“This marks a turning point in the clean energy transition. After many decades of advocacy, research, policymaking, and finally construction, America’s offshore wind industry has gone from a dream to reality,” said Governor Maura Healey. “Across Massachusetts, in 30,000 homes and businesses, when you turn on the light, you will now be using clean, affordable energy. This will make the air we breathe safer and healthier, save customers money, and bring us one step closer to achieving net-zero emissions.”
As a boy, my grandfather owned a home “down the shore” on Long Beach Island (LBI). From the beach, all we saw were swimmers, surf fishers, porpoises, and an occasional vessel on the horizon. The offshore wind industrialization will change the island dramatically.
Attached is the release announcing Save LBI’s intent to sue. Their issues are summarized below:
Constructing and operating hundreds of wind turbines directly in a prime migration path for the critically endangered North Atlantic right whale.
Operational noise from the larger and noisier turbines Atlantic Shores plans to build.
Cumulative impact of the East Coast wind-turbine projects on the right whale’s migration.
Interference with other uses of the ocean including fishing and national security.
No plan or capability, technically or monetarily, to remove turbines and other facilities at the end of their useful life, upon their failure during normal operation, or in the aftermath of a hurricane or other extreme storm event.
Failure to account for structural failures such as the Vineyard Wind turbine blade incident, the damage from such failures to the ocean and beaches, and how that damage will be remediated.
Excessive electric bill increases under the State’s Offshore Wind Energy Development Act.
The Endangered Species Act issues are similar to those that the Nantucket group ACK for Whales is trying to elevate to the Supreme Court.
Perhaps not the best choice of graphic if you want to sell the project as being environmentally benign and compatible with other uses.
Some of us are long-time observers of North Sea operations. Others like JL Daeschler are pioneers who were involved with North Sea exploration and development from the outset. It’s sad to see what is happening to the UK offshore industry.
And for what purpose? Virtue signaling by politicians? Pandering to the international climate cartel? Shutting down North Sea production will have no measurable effect on our climate.
Now that the entire U.S. Atlantic and Pacific, and nearly all of offshore Alaska, are closed to oil and gas leasing, the goal of some is to shut down the Gulf of Mexico. That intent is clear in the 5 year leasing plan that provides for a maximum of 3 sales, the fewest of any 5 year plan in the history of the US offshore program. This is really a 5 year moratorium, not a 5 year leasing plan.
As noted in the post below, GoM production is 1.8 million bopd. BOEM’s reasonable forecast of >2 million bopd through 2027 will not be achieved because of policy decisions, not resource limitations or technical capabilities.
And shame on those who are attributing Hurricane Helene’s destruction to GHG emissions. This is uninformed opportunism at its worst.
This video shows the real cost of Ed Miliband’s plans to shut down the North Sea.
200,000 workers left stranded, billions in tax revenue lost, and clean energy investment deterred.
The stability in Gulf of Mexico oil production rates, as noted when the data for June were released, continued into July. Oil production once again remained remarkably consistent at 1.8 million bopd.
Average daily production was within 1.4% of 1.8 million bopd for each month from February to July. As previously observed, this is as stable as production has been for any 6 month period in the past 10 years.I’m not sure this observation is terribly significant, but it’s interesting nonetheless. 😀
If the streak didn’t end in August, it most certainly did in September given the shut-ins for Hurricanes Francine and Helene.
floating turbine being positioned in Kincardine wind farm
The 50 MW Kincardine Offshore Windfarm, which is billed as the “world’s largest floating wind farm,” experienced a £30 million loss in 2023 following a £18 million loss in 2022. The turbines are located 15 km off the coast of Aberdeenshire, in water depths ranging from 60 m to 80 m.
The graphic below summarizes the 2023 financial results, which were even worse than those for the prior years of operation. For those who want more detail, I have attached the 2023 audited financial statement for the wind farm. You can also view audited statements for prior years.
Although BOEM was forced to “postpone” the Oregon wind sale given the absence of bidders, opposition from tribes and county governments, and a last minute letter from the Governor (political cover?), California still seems to be all in on the development of the 5 deepwater wind leases in Federal waters.
It cost them 46 million quid to make 13 million quid's worth of electricity!
This text message from a close friend of my wife gives you a sense of the enormous challenges being experienced by so many in the wake of the flooding. As background, she lives in the Asheville area. Her home and car were completely destroyed. She was rescued by her brother (subject of the update below), who lived an hour away.
“Thank you. I am at ER. My brother began getting chest pains. Emt came and carted him out on a stretcher. Changed from emergency vehicle to ambulance a few miles down the road. He hasn’t even got here yet. I’ll be called when he is checked in. Fireman drove me here in his truck. Ushered me through the hospital p-lot maze then the long winding path to ER. Thanx for letting the others know. The hospital has a good signal. Even a few blinking traffic lights. The area where I live is devastated. We evacuated to the upper hills where the folks living there took us in. We were completely stranded 2 days until the younger, stronger people devised a path and bushwhacked a way out for cars already on the hill the first car got out this morning. More later…love and thanks to all.♥♥♥“
The Nantucket non-profit ACK for Whales (ACK is the FAA abbreviation for Nantucket Airport) has petitioned the Supreme Court to review the 1st Circuit’s ruling on the Vineyard Wind project. Per the Supreme Court filing (full document attached):
Despite the agencies’ explicit statutory duty to consider all “best information available,” regarding the impacts its actions might have on an endangered or threatened species and those habitats, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), did not consider the cumulative impacts of other planned projects when they authorized and issued permits to construct the Vineyard Wind 1 Project.
Will the Supreme Court accept the case?
“Hail Mary:” Per the Nantucket Current, the odds that the Supreme Court justices will accept the case are exceedingly slim. Of the 7,000 cases that the Supreme Court is asked to review each year, only 100 to 150 of them – about 2 percent – are accepted.
“Really good chance:” Per Val Oliver, ACK for Whales founding director, “In light of the recent Chevron decision, we think we have a really good chance. That was about government overreach and that is what this (Vineyard Wind) has felt like since the beginning: go, go, go, and we’ll figure it out as we go. That’s just not responsible.“
Regardless of the outcome of this case, there is a profound inconsistency in the administration of the Endangered Species Act as evidenced by our comparison of the operating restrictions for the Right whale (Atlantic wind) and Rice’s whale (Gulf of Mexico oil and gas). Note that the more onerous Rice’s whale restrictions were removed by court order.
Bud's Offshore Energy (BOE) 