Posted in climate, energy policy, Gulf of Mexico, Offshore Energy - General, Wind Energy, tagged climate change, deniers, Offshore Wind, solar eclipse, Texas on April 8, 2024| Leave a Comment »
… and you deniers are fully responsible. There’s a reason why Texas is the most affected state 😉
But fear not, we will line our shores with wind turbines, restrict offshore oil and gas leasing, and subsidize carbon disposal in the Gulf of Mexico. All of this “help” will have a negligible effect on the climate, which will continue to change as it always has and always will.
Posted in energy policy, Offshore Energy - General, Offshore Wind, Regulation, tagged 5 year leasing plan, Inflation Reduction Act, offshore oil and gas, Offshore Wind on March 12, 2024| 2 Comments »
(2) the Secretary may not issue a lease for offshore wind development under section 8(p)(1)(C) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C.1337(p)(1)(C)) unless—
‘‘Inflation Reduction Act of 2022,” p. 646
(A) an offshore lease sale has been held during the 1-year period ending on the date of the issuance of the lease for offshore wind development; and (B) the sum total of acres offered for lease in offshore lease sales during the 1-year period ending on the date of the issuance of the lease for offshore wind development is not less than 60,000,000 acres.
Lease Sale 261 was held on 12/20/23. Absent legislative action, no wind leases may be issued after 12/20/24 unless another oil and gas lease sale is held prior to that date. Given that the minimalist 5 year oil and gas leasing plan, which is being challenged, does not propose a sale until 2025, wind lease issuance will likely be suspended at the end of the year. (Note: I wonder if the legislative restriction also applies to lease assignments from existing owners to new owners? Probably not, but that would be very significant given the current state of the offshore wind industry.)
The legislative restriction may be a partial explanation for the apparent rush to issue wind leases. 16 new wind leases were issued in 2022 and 2023, bringing the total number of active leases to 36. The philosophy seems to be this: issue as many leases as you can, as fast as you can, wherever you can (ala James Watt’s failed strategy for the oil and gas program.) Coastal residents are not entirely thrilled.
Perhaps the wind program should be required to develop 5 year leasing plans, as is the case for the oil and gas program. This might facilitate a more holistic approach to wind energy development and ease concerns about cumulative impacts.
Posted in energy policy, Offshore Wind, tagged BOEM, NASEM, NOAA, Offshore Wind, Rice's whale, RIght Whale, strategy on January 29, 2024| 2 Comments »
Key takeaways after reviewing the BOEM/NOAA strategy document:
NARW status (pages 7-14):
BOEM/NOAA strategy:
Questions:
Pictured below: density of NARWs near wind leases and hydrodynamic effects of turbines
Posted in California, decommissioning, Norway, Offshore Energy - General, Offshore Wind, UK, tagged California, decommissioning, Equinor, floating turbines, Hywind, Morro Bay, Offshore Wind on January 22, 2024| 1 Comment »
It’s prudent, if not imperative, to tow floating wind turbines to sheltered coastal locations for major maintenance. For that reason, Hywind, the world’s first floating wind farm will be offline for up to 4 months this summer.
Hywind Scotland‘s operator, Norwegian power giant Equinor, says that operational data has indicated that its wind turbines need work. The pilot project has been in operation since 2017.
The five Siemens Gamesa turbines will be towed to Norway this summer. An Equinor spokesperson said, “This is the first such operation for a floating farm, and the safest method to do this is to tow the turbines to shore and execute the operations in sheltered conditions.”
electrek
Published data indicate that Hywind has been the UK’s best performing offshore wind farm. Performance data for Hywind, and a chart illustrating the capacity factors since commissioning, are posted below. The 2024 capacity factor will, of course, be substantially reduced as a result of the essential offsite maintenance.
| rolling 12 month capacity factor ending 5/2022 | life capacity factor | age (years) | installed capacity (MWp) | total elec generated (GWh) | power/ unit area spanned (W/m2) | |
| Hywind Scotland | 49.5% | 52.6% | 4.6 | 30 | 642 | 1.0 |
The first US floating turbines are expected to be at these California offshore leases, and Hywind operator Equinor is one of the lessees:
Given the financial challenges facing the offshore wind industry, the still emerging technology, and the risks inherent in California offshore development, the amounts bid on these leases only 13 months ago are stunning.
Some Central Coast residents are not enamoured with “another attempt to industrialize the coast.” Although the turbines will be >20 miles offshore, they will have to be towed to shore for major maintenance. For the Central California leases, nearby harbor areas like Morro Bay (pictured below) would be overwhelmed by the large structures and the maintenance and repair operations. Towing the towers to LA/Long Beach, albeit rather distant from the leases, would seem to be the preferred option for such work.
Ironically, a report for BOEM, points to synergies between the offshore wind industry and oil and gas decommissioning industry. Such synergies will only be possible if longstanding oil and gas decommissioning obstacles are satisfactorily addressed and the offshore wind projects proceed as planned.
Which will come first – platform decommissioning or wind turbine commissioning? For those young enough to find out, what is the over-under for the years until (1) half of those platforms are decommissioned, and (2) half of the wind turbines commissioned? Any number <10 is unrealistic for either.
Posted in energy policy, Offshore Wind, Regulation, tagged BOEM, hyperbole, Offshore Wind on December 11, 2023| 1 Comment »
BOEM diminishes the credibility of their important (and generally excellent) scientific, lease administration, and regulatory work with over-the-top wind energy promotion. The tweet below is a recent example.
This is not a good look for the bureau that is expected to objectively evaluate offshore wind projects. Leave the hype to the wind industry and its NGO supporters.
Posted in energy policy, Offshore Wind, Wind Energy, tagged Governor Murphy, New Jersey, Ocean Wind 1, Ocean Wind 2, Offshore Wind, Orsted on November 1, 2023| Leave a Comment »
NJ Governor Murphy, an offshore wind promoter, is not pleased:
“Today’s decision by Orsted to abandon its commitments to New Jersey is outrageous and calls into question the company’s credibility and competence,” the Democratic governor said. “As recently as several weeks ago, the company made public statements regarding the viability and progress of the Ocean Wind I project.”
6ABC NJ
Perhaps the Governor’s credibility and competence is also taking a hit, as is staking the State’s energy future on highly uncertain, intermittent, and facility-intensive power systems. .
Posted in Uncategorized, tagged Cape May suit, Nantucket Current, Nantucket offshore wind, Ocean Wind 1, Offshore Wind on October 19, 2023| Leave a Comment »
Cape May County, NJ is best known for its Atlantic beach resorts from Ocean City at the northeast end of the county to Cape May at its southern tip. The county has recently emerged as the epicenter of resistance to offshore wind development. On Tuesday, the County sued the Federal government over the approval of the Construction and Operations Plan and issuance of the Incidental Harassment Authorization for the Ocean Wind 1 project.
As the first turbines rise offshore Nantucket, this column in the Nantucket Current includes some interesting comments. A couple of quotes:
Additionally, the Maria Mitchell Association and the Nantucket Preservation Trust, co-signers on the Good Neighbor Agreement, canceled scheduled interviews despite the fact that the only thing rising quicker than the first visible wind turbine off Nantucket’s south shore is the local level of uneasiness associated with this eyesore.
In my opinion, the long-term sustainability of offshore wind farms simply doesn’t add up. Seaside communities like Nantucket will become the visual victims of the federal government’s desire to have 30 gigawatts of offshore wind production by 2030. Especially from a financial perspective, what sounded so good a few years ago doesn’t appear so rosy today.
Posted in climate, energy policy, Gulf of Mexico, Offshore Energy - General, Regulation, Wind Energy, tagged 5 year leasing plan, carbon sequestration, Gulf of Mexico exploration slump, Gulf of Mexico oil production, offshore leasing, Offshore Wind on August 16, 2023| Leave a Comment »
Record low exploratory drilling: 2023 will be the third consecutive year with fewer than 50 deepwater exploratory well starts. The only other year this century with <50 deepwater exploratory well starts was 2010 when there was a post-Macondo drilling moratorium.
Low participation: Only 8 companies have started deepwater exploratory wells in 2023 YTD. Anadarko, Chevron, and Shell drilled 78% of the wells, with Shell alone accounting for 48%. Compare these numbers with 2001, when 24 companies drilled 149 deepwater exploratory wells.
Absence of new field discoveries: Per BOEM’s database, no deepwater fields have been discovered since March 2021 and there were only 3 discoveries in the past 5 years (see chart below)
Leasing and regulatory uncertainty: When will the 5 year leasing plan be finalized and how much will leasing be restricted? What will be the effect of the expanded Rice’s whale area on deepwater operations? To what extent is this expansion justified? What other legal and regulatory threats are on the horizon?
Unrealistic expectations regarding the “energy transition:” In a stunning introductory statement, the Proposed 5 Year Leasing Plan expressed concerns that new leases would produce too much oil and gas for too long. OPEC+ must love the way the US sanctions its own energy production, most notably the oil and gas resources of the OCS. More than 96% of the OCS is off-limits to oil and gas leasing, and the 5 year plan proposed to constrain leasing in the only areas that remain. The favored offshore wind program was intended to be a complement to, not a replacement for, the oil and gas program. Wind energy is limited by intermittency, space preemption, navigation, and wildlife protection concerns.
Some companies have visions of the GoM as a carbon dumping hub: The largest US oil company, which hasn’t drilled a well in the GoM in nearly 4 years and operates just one production platform, seeks praise and profit by sequestering CO2 beneath the Gulf while maximizing oil production elsewhere. How will this sustain economically and strategically important GoM oil and gas production?
Posted in Offshore Wind, Uncategorized, tagged 43 years, BOEM, James F Bennett, MMS, Offshore Wind on June 23, 2023| Leave a Comment »
Last week I had the privilege of attending a retirement party for Jim Bennett. Jim spent most of his 43 year Federal career in the OCS program focusing on environmental reviews and offshore wind. Most recently he served as Chief of the Offshore Renewable Energy Program. Congratulations to Jim on a long and very successful career!
Posted in energy policy, Offshore Energy - General, Offshore Wind, tagged advocacy, BOEM, BSEE, Offshore Wind, Regulation, safety, Save LBI on April 18, 2023| Leave a Comment »
This comment from Save LBI (Long Beach Island, NJ) on BOEM’s Renewable Energy Modernization Rule (proposed) highlights an important regulatory policy consideration:
Promoting the offshore wind program is a very high BOEM priority. The bureau is charged with deploying 30 gigawatts of offshore wind energy capacity by 2030, which requires extensive advocacy. However, BOEM is also a core regulator for offshore wind projects, and the concern is that their regulatory role could be compromised by their advocacy priorities.
Per Notice to Lessees 2023 N-01, which arguably should have been published for public comment given its regulatory significance, BOEM has retained important responsibilities for wind project development and operations. These include review and approval of construction and operations plans, site assessment plans, and general activities plans. BOEM may also exercise enforcement authority through the issuance of violation notices and the assessment of civil penalties.
BOEM exists because in 2010 the Administration wanted to separate the OCS program’s leasing (sales/advocacy) and safety (regulatory/enforcement) functions. The intent was to avoid conflicting missions (or the appearance thereof) in the post-Macondo era. (More on this in an upcoming post.)
Ironically, the Save LBI comment describes BSEE as “a distinct unit within BOEM.” That may seem to be the case, but BSEE is actually a separate bureau in the Department of the Interior.
Bud's Offshore Energy (BOE) 