Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘electrification policy’

“The oil and gas industry is crucial for Norway and for Europe.”~ Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre

Posted in energy policy, Norway, Offshore Energy - General, Regulation, tagged , , , , , on May 12, 2026| Leave a Comment »

North Sea, Norwegian Sea and Barents Sea licensing area has been expanded by 70 blocks.

In announcing its annual licensing round, Norway expresses strong support for offshore exploration and production:

The oil and gas industry is crucial for Norway and for Europe. The government is today announcing new exploration areas in the APA (Allocations in Predefined Areas) to further develop the petroleum sector, so that it can continue to create great value for the community, lay the foundation for good jobs throughout the country, ensure our common welfare and contribute to Europe’s energy security and safety, says Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre.

Kudos to Norway for the strong, unequivocal announcement. Consistent acreage offerings are important in sustaining offshore production:

Allocations in Predefined Areas (APA) are an annual licensing round that covers the best-known exploration areas on the continental shelf. Through the APA scheme, oil companies gain predictability regarding access to exploration acreage, which is important for a long-term industry such as the petroleum industry. After more than 50 years of exploration activity, the APA scheme today covers the majority of the area that is opened and available on the Norwegian continental shelf.

This is what it takes to sustain oil production at about 2 million barrels/day and gas production at over 10 billion cu ft/day.

Norway also has an exemplary risk and performance-based regulatory regime administered by Havtil.

Perhaps less pragmatic, in the opinion of this observer, are these policies:

Read Full Post »

As Norway considers cutting the cord to Europe, is transmitting electric power to offshore platforms good public policy?

Posted in climate, energy policy, Norway, Offshore Energy - General, UK, tagged , , , , , , , , , on January 6, 2025| Leave a Comment »

Equinor diagram: power cables from shore to Johan Sverdrup field

“It’s an absolutely sh*t situation,” said Norway’s energy minister Terje Aasland reacting to electricity prices in the country that are six times that of the EU average.

The two ruling parties in Norway want to cut the two power inter-connectors that link the country with Denmark when they come up for renewal in 2026. The smaller coalition party, the Center Party, wants to revisit similar energy links with the UK and Europe.

A related matter is Norway’s push to power offshore platforms with electricity from shore. This policy makes neither economic nor environmental sense, and introduces new safety and operational risks.

This BOE post cites the obvious (per NPD): “The power from shore projects will lead to an increase in electricity prices in Norway.” The post also presents seven other reasons why powering those facilities from shore is not a good idea.

Meanwhile, Total’s plan to partially power the Culzean field (UK) with a floating turbine is similarly irrational. The scheme adds costs and risks with no apparent benefit.

Read Full Post »

Loss of power to Johan Sverdrup field raises further questions about Norway’s push to electrify offshore facilities

Posted in accidents, climate, Norway, Offshore Energy - General, tagged , , , , , , on November 20, 2024| Leave a Comment »

Johan Sverdrup field, 155 km from shore

Production from Equinor’s important Johan Sverdrup field, which accounts for 755,000 bopd (36% of Norway’s oil production), was shut-in on Monday as a result of a power outage. Production was in the process of being restored on Tuesday.

According to Equinor, the outage was caused by overheating at an electric converter station onshore.

A 2022 BOE post questioned Norway’s push to power offshore platforms with electricity transmitted from shore. This incident reinforces those concerns. Summary:

  • Most offshore platforms produce sufficient gas to support their power demands
  • Assuming gas that is not used to power a platform is marketed and consumed elsewhere, the net (global) reduction in CO2 emissions from electrifying offshore platforms is negligible. (Perhaps there is actually a small increase in net emissions given the power required to transport the gas to markets and the emissions associated with onshore power generation).
  • Offshore power demands are highly variable, especially when drilling operations are being conducted.
  • Gas turbines are reliable, and capable of responding to variable power demand. Excess generation capacity is typically provided.
  • Power from shore increases the cost of platform operations and could decrease ultimate recovery of oil and gas resources.
  • Per NPD, electrification of the shelf will increase electricity prices for onshore consumers and increase the need for onshore facility investment.
  • Gas turbines or diesel generators are still necessary to satisfy emergency power needs at the platforms.
  • Long power cables are vulnerable to damage (accidental or intentional), as are onshore power stations.

I hope the investigation of this incident considers some of these broader electrification policy issues.

Equinor diagram: The purple cable shows power from shore to Johan Sverdrup phase 1, established in 2018. The yellow power cable shows power from shore to Johan Sverdrup phase 2 and the Utsira High area solution, from 2022. The orange cable shows power from shore to the Sleipner field centre and connected fields from late 2022. Black cable shows existing power cables at Sleipner field centre and to the Gudrun installation.

Read Full Post »