Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Sable Offshore’

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), as passed by the House this week, includes an amendment (attached) authorizing the Federal govt to acquire all lands along the Santa Ynez Pipeline System route. Wesley Hunt (TX), who introduced the amendment, comments in the short video below. The Senate has yet to approve the bill.

Assuming Sable’s attorneys are able to continue navigating through the legal minefield, the success of the project will depend on the performance of Sable’s well operations and production teams, and the extent to which they have the authority and confidence to curtail operations when deemed necessary to protect workers and the environment. In that regard, MMA engineers and inspectors have an important role in identifying risks and assuring that they are mitigated.

Excerpt from the amendment:

SEC. 28ll. ACQUISITION OF EASEMENTS FOR DEFENSE FUEL SUPPLY INFRASTRUCTURE.
(a) AUTHORITY TO ACQUIRE.—The Secretary of Defense is authorized to acquire, by purchase, donation, exchange, or condemnation, on behalf of the United States, such permanent easements over all lands along the route of the Santa Ynez Pipeline System, including all lands owned or otherwise held by the State of California or any agency, department, or instrumentality thereof, as the Secretary of Defense determines necessary to ensure continuous pipeline transportation of crude oil from the Santa Ynez Unit to domestic refineries supplying Department of Defense installations in the State of California

Read Full Post »

Image of Who Is Dolly Gee? A Look at the Judge Deciding the Fate of Trump’s Executive Order - The New York Times
Federal Judge Dolly Gee, Central District of California

Sable Offshore and Exxon had alleged that Santa Barbara County’s refusal to transfer title and permits for Santa Ynez Unit facilities from Exxon to Sable amounted to an unconstitutional taking of their property rights. Judge Gee disagreed.

As colorfully put by Nick Welsh at the Santa Barbara Independent, Judge Gee told Sable and Exxon to “go pound sand” (not literally, but the judicial equivalent). The judge refused to even allow Sable to amend their filing. The judge will however allow Exxon to file an amended complaint, given that the company still has vested rights to the facilities and is still on the hook for the decommissioning costs.

As always with these Santa Ynez Unit matters, there is much more to come!

Read Full Post »

Per the preliminary EIA data for April, Gulf of America OCS facilities produced an average of 2.107 million bopd in April. This surpasses the previous record of 2.060 million bopd set in January.

Meanwhile, the Sable bump is now evident in the EIA’s Pacific OCS production data with a ~50% March-April increase from January-February. A bigger increase should be apparent when the May numbers are posted. How will Sable fare in the upcoming court battles?

Read Full Post »

Sable Offshore began ramping up production at Platform Harmony last May delivering oil and gas to their Los Flores Canyon Processing Facility. In March, they resumed transportation to the Pentland pipeline segments and achieved first sales.

Below are BOEM production data for Harmony through March 2026. Harmony production was expected to increase to 22,000 bopd in May. Similarly, Sable forecasted Heritage production of 30,000 bopd for that month. The actual production numbers should be available in a month or two.

Nothing in the March production data for Harmony is particularly surprising. The gas-oil ratio (GOR) of ~1000 cu ft/bbl is rather typical for oil production in the region, as is the water cut, although less water production would be preferred. Produced water is not discharged from the platform, but is injected subsurface through disposal wells.

Read Full Post »

Meanwhile, the California Coastal Commission notified Sable Offshore that it intends to issue a cease and desist order aimed at shutting down crude oil extraction in the Santa Barbara Channel.

Sable responds: “Sable Offshore Corp. (“Sable”) through its subsidiary, Pacific Pipeline Company (“PPC”), continues to lawfully operate through its existing coastal development permits which were issued in 1986.”

California cage fight! Who ya’ got?

Read Full Post »

DOT and others shouldn’t make statements they can’t back up (see the X post below).

As a supporter of responsible offshore oil and gas operations, I find statements like this to be irresponsible and embarrassing. Sable Offshore is not using newer or safer drilling technology than is used in many other areas.

Read Full Post »

Sable posts

Read Full Post »

SYU near-term workover plan; estimated reserve additions exceed production.

Those who have been following the Santa Ynez Unit saga should take a look at Sable’s informative PowerPoint update (attached). The presentation includes reserve data, well operation plans, production forecasts, financial and legal updates, and regional energy supply information.

Also, Sable CEO Jim Flores has announced that Energy Secretary Wright and Interior Secretary Burgum will be visiting the project this week. Transportation Secretary Duffy was also expected, but he will not be attending.

Read Full Post »

Sable Offshore (SOC) surged 12% on Thursday. Here’s why:

Judge Stephen V. Wilson, US District Court for the Central District of California ruled that Sable’s pipeline doesn’t imminently harm Gaviota Park. Judge Wilson said the state “is grasping at straws,” for evidence of real environmental harm, and the federal consent decree governing the terms of the system’s restart is controlled by the California Office of the State Fire Marshall, not the parks department.

The judge didn’t rule on the larger question of whether the Defense Production Act order to restart the Las Flores pipeline system was lawful.

Read Full Post »

On 5/14/2026, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California dismissed the complaint filed by the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) against the Dept. of the Interior. This was one of the less prominent cases challenging Sable Offshore’s oil and gas operations in the Santa Ynez Unit. 

The CBD had challenged an April 2025 BOEM decision concluding that Sable was not required to revise its development and production plan for the SYU. They sought a court order requiring a revised plan. This suit seemed to be a stretch, so its dismissal is not a surprise.

Per the Dept. of Justice, the court dismissed the lawsuit because the plaintiffs’ asserted procedural injury had no basis in the statute, was not traceable to any action by BOEM, and could not be redressed by an order of the court. (Other than that, it was just fine. 😉)

Among other problems the court identified with the plaintiffs’ case, they invoked a provision of the statute that governs “approval of a development and production plan,” not revision of an already-existing plan. It will be interesting to see the full decision so that we can better understand the context for that statement. Distinguishing revised plans in that manner could have significant policy implications.

For a full update on Sable litigation, see the section of their Quarterly Report beginning on p. 12.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »