Posts Tagged ‘CEO comments’
-
Archives
- March 2026 (10)
- February 2026 (26)
- January 2026 (30)
- December 2025 (32)
- November 2025 (26)
- October 2025 (29)
- September 2025 (29)
- August 2025 (29)
- July 2025 (27)
- June 2025 (25)
- May 2025 (46)
- April 2025 (39)
- March 2025 (28)
- February 2025 (34)
- January 2025 (34)
- December 2024 (28)
- November 2024 (25)
- October 2024 (34)
- September 2024 (32)
- August 2024 (29)
- July 2024 (32)
- June 2024 (20)
- May 2024 (25)
- April 2024 (25)
- March 2024 (24)
- February 2024 (27)
- January 2024 (29)
- December 2023 (27)
- November 2023 (32)
- October 2023 (32)
- September 2023 (30)
- August 2023 (31)
- July 2023 (22)
- June 2023 (27)
- May 2023 (28)
- April 2023 (29)
- March 2023 (36)
- February 2023 (26)
- January 2023 (31)
- December 2022 (39)
- November 2022 (30)
- October 2022 (28)
- September 2022 (39)
- August 2022 (37)
- July 2022 (33)
- June 2022 (40)
- May 2022 (39)
- April 2022 (28)
- March 2022 (38)
- February 2022 (29)
- January 2022 (28)
- December 2021 (25)
- November 2021 (33)
- October 2021 (32)
- September 2021 (32)
- August 2021 (23)
- July 2021 (4)
- August 2011 (5)
- July 2011 (25)
- June 2011 (18)
- May 2011 (41)
- April 2011 (22)
- March 2011 (60)
- February 2011 (46)
- January 2011 (46)
- December 2010 (24)
- November 2010 (50)
- October 2010 (40)
- September 2010 (53)
- August 2010 (50)
- July 2010 (48)
- June 2010 (65)
- May 2010 (40)
- April 2010 (49)
- March 2010 (17)
- February 2010 (13)
-
Categories
- accidents (667)
- well control incidents (333)
- Alaska (39)
- Australia (14)
- NOPSEMA (6)
- Bahamas (2)
- Barbados (3)
- California (199)
- Canada (40)
- CCS (49)
- climate (193)
- conferences (36)
- cuba (23)
- decommissioning (118)
- deep sea mining (17)
- drilling (157)
- energy (77)
- energy policy (763)
- flaring and venting (13)
- Florida (9)
- Georges Bank (7)
- Gulf of Mexico (574)
- Guyana (51)
- Health (13)
- hurricanes (59)
- Interviews (4)
- IRF (14)
- Jamaica (19)
- Mexico (13)
- natural gas (77)
- NOPSEMA (2)
- Norway (80)
- offshore (32)
- Offshore Energy – General (1,158)
- oil spill response (25)
- pipelines (132)
- Regulation (334)
- rigs-to-reefs (29)
- Russia (26)
- seeps (8)
- UK (74)
- Uncategorized (436)
- Wind Energy (255)
- Offshore Wind (229)
- accidents (667)
-
Pages
Total wants to sit on their wind lease until the next administration (2029). Can they do that?
Posted in energy policy, Offshore Wind, tagged Attentive Energy, BOEM, CEO comments, COP deadline, diligent development, lease cancellation, OCSLA, Total, wind lease on December 3, 2024| Leave a Comment »
Impressive arrogance from the CEO of a foreign company that paid $795 million for a lease (OCS-A 0538) that was worth pennies on the dollar even before the Presidential election:
“Offshore wind, I have decided to put the project on pause” with Trump’s return, Total Chief Executive Officer Patrick Pouyanne said at an energy industry conference in London on Tuesday.
“I said to my team, the project in New York, we’ll see that in four years,” he said. “But the advantage is it’s only for four years.”
Perhaps Mr. Pouyanne thinks Total owns those 84,332 acres in the Atlantic or that they have the right to hold the leased area indefinitely. They do not. The OCS Lands Act calls for diligent development of leases and BOEM has promulgated implementing regulations.
The Total (Attentive Energy) lease was issued on 5/1/2022. Per 30 CFR § 585.235(a)(1), the company must submit a Construction and Operations Plant (COP) no later than 5/1/2027, more than 20 months before the end of the Trump administration. BOEM will have ample time to act on the plan prior to the next administration.
BOEM could also call for progress updates and an earlier COP submittal if there is evidence that the lessee is not moving forward with development plans (as would already seem to be the case given Mr. Pouyanne’s public statements in London).
In the absence of progress in developing the lease, BOEM could seek cancellation (§ 556.1102) for failure to comply with the diligence mandate in OCSLA (556.1102 (a)). Cancellation could also be pursued based on misrepresentations in acquiring the lease (556.1102 (c)) or the threat of unacceptable harm to the environment or national security (556.1102 (d)).
Rather than making rash comments at a public forum in London, perhaps Mr. Pouyanne would have been wise to first meet with energy officials of the new administration early next year. At a minimum, the CEO’s comments will help justify any attempts to cancel the Total (Attentive Energy) lease on diligence grounds.
Read Full Post »