Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Norway’

The Snorre field is in 300-380m of water in the North Sea ~200 km west of Floro.

According to Reuters and others, Equinor will no longer pursue electrification of Snorre A and B, Heidrun, Aasgard B, and Kristin platforms, but still plans to proceed with projects at Grane and Balder fields.

A number of BOE posts since Jan. 2022 have questioned Norway’s electrification strategy for offshore platforms. Our reasons:

  • 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.

The reliability, cost, and cable vulnerability concerns have clearly been validated. The reality is that powering distant platforms from shore increases operating costs, safety risks, and onshore electricity prices with no net environmental benefit.

It also seems rather hypocritical for a major natural gas exporter to prevent offshore operators from powering their platforms with gas produced at their platforms.

Read Full Post »

Protect Our Coast – NJ graphic

Along with other charges, the attached complaint asserts that awarding a wind lease to Norway’s Equinor, violates the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA):

  1. As an agency or instrumentality of Norway, Equinor cannot receive a lease on the Outer Continental Shelf for offshore wind turbine development or generation of electric power.

While other elements of the complaint appear to have merit, the charge against Norway does not. Here’s why:

  • US subsidiaries of foreign companies have long held leases under the OCS Lands Act.
  • Equinor US Wind is the US subsidiary holding the wind lease.
  • Equinor USA E&P holds interests in OCS oil and gas leases in the Gulf of America. BOEM credits 548,389 barrels of oil production to Equinor for 2023.
  • Chinese state-owned CNOOC has been an oil and gas lessee in the Gulf of America.
  • US subsidiaries of Shell and BP, both foreign corporations, are the top 2 producers in the Gulf. Although not government owned, there is nothing in OCSLA that distinguishes between US subsidiaries of private and govt owned companies. Woodside (Australia) and Eni (Italy) are also important Gulf producers.

The plaintiffs second count (excerpt below) seems to have more merit. The bulk of the filing pertains to this count.

  1. BOEM never completed its “necessary review”, see Stop Work Order, April 16, 2025, and, instead, reinstated the Empire Wind work permit on May 19, 2025 without any explanation or finding, stating as follows:
    On April 16, 2025, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management issued a Director’s Order to Empire Offshore Wind LLC to halt all ongoing activities related to the Empire Wind Project on the outer continental shelf. That Order is hereby amended to lift the halt on activities during the ongoing review.

The complaint goes on to discuss the reasons why the plaintiffs believe the review was indeed necessary and should have been conducted.

Read Full Post »

With victory in sight, the President pulled the ball away from his most ardent East Coast supporters.

Further thoughts on the reasons for the Empire Wind reversal:

  • Legal/regulatory: Although lease cancellation is not a reasonable option at this time, a pause for further review of the environmental and procedural issues is justified. During the previous Administration, the regulators seemed to function primarily as cheerleaders, as evidenced by the departures (examples here and here), the BOEM/NOAA strategy document, and the promotional tweets. Also, where is the long awaited report on the turbine blade failure? How do you proceed with development before that has been released for public review?
  • Norwegian govt intervention: Some would argue that Empire Wind was a bad investment by Equinor (2/3 govt owned) and it would have been better to take the losses and move on.
  • Trade unions: Concerns about the job losses are warranted, but the long term viability of the subsidy dependent offshore wind industry is in doubt, and important industries (e.g. fishing and tourism) may be negatively impacted. Other job losses could occur if offshore wind drives up electric prices and decreases grid reliability.
  • Pipeline deal: The regionally important Constitution natural gas pipeline is still very much in doubt despite reports of a deal with Governor Hochul. With or without her support, climate-ultras are driving NY/New England energy policy and will, at a minimum, stall this project. Fisheries Nation was particularly blunt in criticizing fishermen being “used as a poker chip” to gain tepid support for the pipeline project.

Following the reversal of the Empire Wind decision, Green Oceans, ACK for Whales, Long Island Commercial Fishing Association, Protect Our Westport Waters, Save Greater Dowses Beach, Save Right Whales Coalition, and the Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head/Aquinnah petitioned Secretary Burgum to halt all wind construction in New England coastal waters and begin a “complete reevaluation” of their permits under applicable federal laws. In addition to right whale and tribal cultural resources concerns, the letter cited:

  • Critical habitat destruction impacting cod spawning grounds.
  • Inadequate response to turbine blade failures and environmental cleanup.
  • Severe adverse impacts on regional fisheries and economic displacement.
  • Compromised national defense radar and marine safety capabilities.
  • Misleading economic analyses that omit substantial regional job losses and increased electricity prices.

Read Full Post »

The Administration has not yet explained the decision to allow the Empire Wind project to go forward. I suspect the following points apply:

  1. Attorneys advised, probably correctly, that the Administration would likely lose this case in the courts. Although the Secretary of the Interior has broad authority under OCSLA to suspend operations, he would need strong justification to do so indefinitely. Equinor has invested $billions in the project and their contractual rights would be difficult to abrogate.
  2. Equinor is 2/3 owned by the Norwegian govt, which engaged in diplomacy on Equinor’s behalf. Jens Stoltenberg, former PM of Norway and NATO chief, commented on X: “I commend the Trump Administration for our great cooperation in reaching an energy deal that allows Equinor to resume construction of Empire Wind. This will benefit both our countries & deliver energy to thousands of US households.”
  3. The project has strong support from trade unions.
  4. NY Gov. Hochul appears to have relaxed her position on gas pipelines: “I also reaffirmed that New York will work with the Administration and private entities on new energy projects that meet the legal requirements under New York law.” 

A post on X by Protect Our Coast NJ summarizes the position of project opponents: “There are no words. There was a shocking announcement last night that the federal government reversed course on the Empire Wind Project. We were stunned to see this news. We believe that offshore wind anywhere is a terrible idea. And this project off New York and New Jersey lies in an especially important area—from a national security, environmental and economic perspective. We supported the President’s policy against offshore wind development. And we celebrated Secretary Bergum’s decision to stop the Empire Wind project a few weeks ago. At the time, he said Equinor ‘rushed through by the prior administration without sufficient analysis or consultation among the relevant agencies as relates to the potential effects from the project.’ What changed in the past six weeks? Offshore wind is an extremely expensive, inefficient and unreliable source of power. It harms wildlife, including some of the most endangered mammals on planet Earth. We will fight to protect our coastal and marine ecosystems from the devastation brought by offshore wind construction and operations. We won’t stop until every scrap of steel is removed from the ocean. And we will work to ensure that government officials fully understand the ramifications to public safety, commerce and national defense Empire Wind represents.

There are also concerns among Norwegian investors about this project:

Read Full Post »

Best wishes to our Norwegian friends on their National Day, which celebrates the signing of their Constitution on May 17, 1814. Gratulerer med dagen!

Read Full Post »

We will explore more, find more and extract more. Therefore, it is important to ensure that companies have stable access to exploration areas. Never before has a larger area been advertised in a licensing round. It is good for Norway and for Europe,” Energy Minister Terje Aasland said in a statement.

Further exploration and more discoveries are crucial to limiting the decline in production on the continental shelf after 2030. The expansion this year gives companies access to significant new acreage in the Barents Sea and we are thus even better positioned to clarify the resource base in the north,” added Aasland.

Comments:

  • This is a prudent policy decision that underscores Norway’s commitment to sustaining oil and gas production.
  • This should be good news for Equinor, which is 2/3 Norwegian govt owned and has made some ill-advised offshore wind investments.
  • Based on the Energy Minister’s quotes (above), one senses that Equinor’s wind investments, particularly those in the US, may not be fully aligned with Norwegian policy.
  • Is this a bit embarrassing for the UK, which has essentially been sanctioning its own offshore oil and gas industry? Only last week, Aasland met with his UK counterpart Ed Miliband and entered into a “green industrial partnership” (photo below).
from Upstream: NTB/SCANPIX photo

Read Full Post »

Johan Sverdrup field, 155 km from shore

On Tuesday, Equinor halted all production from the Johan Sverdrup field, western Europe’s biggest producer. An outage in the offshore power system has been cited as the cause.

A Jan. 26, 2022 BOE post questioned Norway’s electrification policy for offshore platforms. Another post discussed a loss of power to the Sverdrup field only 10 weeks ago.

In addition to the production losses, these incidents increase safety risks and onshore electricity prices with no net environmental benefit.

Hopefully, the investigation reports will be posted so that the lessons learned can be shared.

Electric cables from shore power the Johan Sverdrup field

Read Full Post »

Centre Party leader Trygve Slagsvold Vedum: “What we were clear about all along is that beginning the process of linking ourselves more closely to the EU’s dysfunctional electricity market and energy policy is completely out of the question.”

While looking at electric prices and power sharing, consideration should be given to the desirability of transmitting electricity from shore to distant offshore platforms that have ample natural gas for power generation purposes. This practice increases electric prices for consumers and introduces reliability/safety concerns with no net environmental benefits.

No photo description available.
Picture of Old Stavanger where former colleague and BOE contributor Odd Bjerre Finnestad (RIP) once lived. Stavanger is both a lovely city and the “Oil Capital of Norway.”

Read Full Post »

Equinor’s investment in Orsted and their Empire Wind project in the US Atlantic are featured in this DN article (translated to English). Excerpts follow:

Equinor’s investment of over 26 billion kroner in the Danish wind power company Ørsted has so far been a financial disaster – and now it’s going from bad to worse.

We are very negative about the whole green initiative, as the return on the investments they make is far too low. When they also buy minority stakes in other green companies that we cannot count on, such as Ørsted, it means that we would rather own other oil companies.” Gaute Eie, Eika Kapitalforvaltning

The market has long been concerned that Equinor will throw money at renewable projects with low or no profitability.

In a recent note, Pareto analysts Tom Erik Kristiansen and Olav Haugerud point out that the Ørsted writedown does not bode well for Equinor’s own US projects either. They foresee a writedown of up to $1.1 billion, given that Equinor faces the same type of challenges as Ørsted.

Eie believes there is no reason why Equinor in particular should have a green initiative:

Aker BP is not doing green, Vår Energi is not doing green, and all the big oil companies are going back on this. Then we’ll see if Equinor has the guts to buy even more Ørsted shares, because now it’s 35 percent cheaper. If they do, we’ll have even fewer Equinor shares.

Sissener believes Equinor should rather focus on dividends and concentrate on oil and gas projects.

We generally stay away from companies where the state is a major owner, because there you have to be so politically correct all the time. What we need are shareholder-friendly board representatives who know how to run a business and maintain control. In a broader perspective, this helps to destroy trust in Norwegian business.

Read Full Post »

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 »

Older Posts »