Feeds:
Posts
Comments

S&P Global reports on the surge in Iranian oil production and exports. In the quote below, note the concern about the higher oil prices that might result from tightening the sanctions. If oil price concerns are driving critical foreign policy decisions, this would be a rather stunning indictment of US energy policy, which is sometimes perceived as being more hostile toward domestic producers than international adversaries.

Before the war, US-Iranian tensions had eased, which facilitated higher Iranian oil exports. Iranian crude oil production increased 500,000 b/d from March to September 2023 — to 3.1 million b/d from 2.6 million,” the analysts said. “Biden will be under pressure to enforce sanctions and curtail Iranian export revenue. This is a challenging situation for the Biden administration, which wants more oil on the market, not less. The attacks on Israel could override the oil issue.

There was an exchange on this topic at yesterday’s White House press briefing:

Q. I wanted to ask you about oil, if I could, and the money that it’s bringing in.  So, is the amount of oil that’s being brought in by Iran — specifically, records amount, 85 percent to China, more oil being sold above the price cap from Russia — giving the President any pause on changing these energy policies for fossil fuels here in the U.S.?

MR. KIRBY:  I would — just let me back up a little bit.  I mean, it’s important to remember that Iran gets most of its oil revenue off the black market and evad- — evading sanctions, which they do.  It’s costly to them.  In fact, our evidence is that they really only receive a fraction of the market value of the oil that they sell, because they have to sell it on the black market. 

We will always, as we do in any case, typically, revisit sanctions regimes to see if they need to be changed or adjusted, specifically with respect to Iranian oil.

The President, since the beginning of the administration, has been concerned about making sure we have a viable global market for oil, working hard to keep the prices of gasoline down here in the United States.  Part of that is making sure you remove some of the volatility in that global supply and demand. 

I don’t have any announcements or decisions to make today with respect to any changes to the domestic oil production

Q    But isn’t it a national security issue when you have countries that are profiting off of oil and the increased price of oil that don’t like Israel, that don’t like America?

MR. KIRBY:  We don’t want, for instance, Russia to be able to — to get a windfall in profits from the oil market so that they can then turn that around and — and apply that to weapons in Ukraine.  We certainly don’t want to see Iran do — be able to do much of the same, which is why we’re — we’re putting as much pressure on them as we are.

Q    So, why not increase oil production here?

MR. KIRBY:  I — again, I don’t have any announcements to make today.

On a related note, the Strategic Petroleum Reserve has remained at historic low levels. The current volume is 351.3 million barrels, a slight rise from the low of 346.8 million barrels in July, the lowest volume since 8/19/1983 when the SPR was still being filled. Have the oil embargoes following the Yom Kippur War, the reason for the SPR’s existence, been forgotten?

Impressive acquisition:

Hypocrisy?

  • Exxon is clearly intent on maximizing production in the Permian. This makes good business sense and is good for the US economy.
  • Contradictorily, Exxon intends to establish a CO2 disposal business (“carbon sequestration”) in the Gulf of Mexico. Is their goal to profit from emissions resulting from the consumption of the production that they are maximizing?
  • If Exxon believes the consumption of oil and gas is harmful to society, as suggested by their CO2 disposal plans, perhaps they should be curtailing their oil and gas production business rather than expanding it.
  • Deepwater Gulf of Mexico production, which Exxon has shunned, has much lower carbon intensity than Permian production, but Exxon’s sole GoM interest is CO2 disposal. Shouldn’t a company that is intent on reducing upstream GHG emissions be active in the leading offshore region in that regard, the region that is adjacent to their world headquarters?

API’s comments on the Rice’s whale restrictions include a balanced assessment by Darren Ireland (begins on p. 22), a respected marine mammal scientist, and a good analysis of the economic impacts by EIAP.

Darren Ireland concludes (emphasis added):

The proposed critical habitat has been deemed, by NMFS, to have the essential physical and biological features needed for the Rice’s whale to feed, breed, and reproduce. However, direct evidence for what oceanographic features within the 100-400 m isobath band identified by NMFS are required to sustain the Rice’s whale is lacking, and the extent of those truly important features elsewhere in the GOMx is uncertain and may not reach into the central or northwestern GOMx as predicted by the habitat based density model (Garrison et al. 2023). Even though there is evidence to support the possible occurrence of Rice’s whale near the FGBNMS in the northwestern GOMx, there are no data that show this area is being used to support important life history functions such as breeding, feeding, or migrating. Additionally, the sightings and acoustic detections that have been recorded there are much less frequent than those recorded for Rice’s whale in the core habitat in the northeastern GOMx. Based on the limited data available on the use and occurrence of Rice’s whale in the central and northwestern GOMx (one acoustic study (Soldevilla et al. 2022b), one confirmed sighting (NMFS 2018a) and a few unconfirmed sightings (Rosel et al. 2021)), there is insufficient scientific evidence to determine that essential features for Rice’s whale conservation are indeed present in the central and northwestern GOMx. In fact, data on the life-history requirements of Rice’s whale even in the core habitat are still lacking and need further investigation.

EIAP’s key findings on the estimated economic impacts from these restrictions are summarized in the table below. Those are very significant costs given the uncertainty of the whale habitat in the central and western GoM.

Separate comments submitted by the Offshore Operators Committee are also quite strong. Their letter is attached.

Production at Chevron’s Leviathan, a giant offshore gas field

This may come as a surprise to many, but Israel produced 752 billion cubic feet of gas in 2022, which is nearly equivalent to US offshore gas production (788 bcf in 2022).

Chevron is the main operator in Israel, having purchased Noble’s assets in 2020. Absent Noble’s bold and pioneering exploration in the Eastern Mediterranean, Israel would have continued to be an energy importer dependent on coal for power generation.

Presumably, the protection of these offshore assets is a high priority for the Israeli Navy.

In June, Israel gave preliminary approval for the development of a gas field off the Gaza Strip. The Gaza Marine field is 30 km offshore and is estimated to hold more than a trillion cubic feet of gas.

Hamas has affirmed their rights to the resources offshore Gaza.

Prime Minister Netanyahu’s office linked approval to progress on “preserving the State of Israel’s security and diplomatic needs.”

Hopes for developing the Gaza Marine field have presumably been dashed along with the associated economic benefits for the people of Gaza.

Ed Tennyson

Edward J. Tennyson passed away last Friday at his Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia home. Ed worked in the Department of the Interior’s offshore program for more than 20 years, and arguably has done more than any single individual to advance oil spill response capabilities. A few of Ed’s many achievements:

  • Ohmsett: EPA operated the Ohmsett spill response test tank in Leonardo, New Jersey, beginning in the early 1970s, but the facility fell into disrepair in the 1980s. Thanks to Ed’s vision and persistence, and the enactment of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, the Minerals Management Service (MMS) began restoring the facility. Ed led the effort and did everything from operating forklifts to designing upgrades. Senator Frank Lautenberg (NJ) and a host of dignitaries participated in the grand reopening event in 1992. It was an amazing day, and Ohmsett, MMS’s only industrial facility, has exceeded even Ed’s lofty expectations. 
  • Burning oil slicks: Ed and a few of his US and international partners were the first to consider in situ burning as an oil spill response method. After some lab work, Ed proposed larger scale testing at Ohmsett in the presence of ice. The testing was amazingly successful, removing almost all of the oil. When Ed told a leading skeptic about the impressive results, his response was “you didn’t do it right.” 😀 
  • Newfoundland burn: Because research spills were prohibited in US waters, Ed worked with his Canadian partners to conduct an in situ burning test offshore Newfoundland in 1993. Ed was an amazing leader during any kind of field trials, and was always the first person on the dock directing team members to their stations!
  • Remote sensing: Ed’s research led to a patent on the use of shipborne radar for locating oil slicks. Ed greatly advanced this capability by developing tools for airborne mapping and thickness determinations. As Ed frequently said, “90% of the oil is in 10% of the area.” By identifying where the oil was thickest, you could optimize spill response. (Ed was also an expert at identifying slicks with what he called his mach 20 eyeball 😀).
  • Chemical treatment: Ed was a leader in researching dispersants, herding agents, and other chemical methods for preventing spills from impacting shorelines or other sensitive areas.

Ed was an entertaining and informative speaker and was often called upon to brief congressional panels, and discuss his research at public meetings and professional conferences. He was rightfully a media darling and was often contacted for comments on oil spill response matters. Perhaps his most famous quote was in the Wall Street Journal during the Valdez spill in Prince William Sound. Ed described the spill response as follows: “Like mowing a 40 acre field with a 1/4 inch lawn mower.” 😉

RIP Ed, you made a difference!

Newfoundland Offshore Burn Experiment, 1993

That’s the Polar Pioneer, an arctic class rig built in 1985 that last operated in the Chukchi Sea in 2015. The rig was recycled in Aliaga, Turkey in 2020. The US arctic, like 96.3% of US offshore waters, is no longer open to oil and gas leasing, and was not included in the new leasing program.

The Polar Pioneer was once a good rig for sub-arctic operations, but is not at all similar to the modern drilling units that are used on the deepwater Gulf of Mexico leases that now account for 93% of OCS oil production and 76% of the natural gas. With the exception of the GoM shelf, which is laudably being gleaned by independent producers, the deepwater GoM blocks are all that is left of the once robust US offshore leasing program.

Unless the picture of the scrapped drilling rig is intended to be symbolic of the current state of the leasing program, the photo choice implies inattention to significant technical details. The document does not include a single picture of a deepwater drilling unit or production facility.

Tommy Beaudreau, an Obama appointee during the turbulent months following the Macondo blowout, has announced that he will be leaving the Department of the Interior (DOI) at the end of the month.

Tommy first served as Senior Advisor in the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement (BOEMRE), a transition bureau in the wake of the blowout, and was later named Director of the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), one of the two new bureaus that were established to manage the offshore program. He subsequently served as DOI Chief of Staff, and was appointed Deputy Secretary in 2021.

Tommy was a strong leader and an energy moderate. He was highly regarded by the rank and file in BOEMRE and BOEM.

The press release announcing his departure is very professional with appropriate quotes from Secretary Haaland and Tommy. No reasons for his resignation are provided. However, given his balanced perspective on energy development, it would not be wildly speculative to suggest that he might have been a bit uncomfortable working in the policy bubble that produced documents like the latest offshore leasing plan.

Per the Jamaica Gleaner:

United Oil and Gas Plc, which holds the right to search for oil offshore Jamaica, gave notice to investors that it would announce a preferred drilling partner in weeks.

The UK-based explorer requires a partner to split the risk for drilling offshore, which it estimates at US$30 million.

United Oil holds oil and gas assets in Egypt, United Kingdom and a high-impact exploration licence in Jamaica. Its net worth, at US$27.7 million, is less than the cost to drill a test well, but its team of professionals are betting on the island.

The Walton-Morant license