Please support this Forum and Neven's Blog

Author Topic: Arctic Drilling and Shipping  (Read 20054 times)

slow wing

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 564
    • View Profile
Re: Arctic Drilling and Shipping
« Reply #50 on: September 28, 2015, 11:01:09 AM »
SHELL IS PULLING OUT OF THE ARCTIC!!!  ;D ;D


Shell abandons Alaska Arctic drilling
Oil giant’s US president says hugely controversial drilling operations off Alaska will stop for ‘foreseeable future’ as drilling finds little oil and gas

Terry Macalister and agencies
Monday 28 September 2015 09.27 BST


Shell has abandoned its controversial drilling operations in the Alaskan Arctic in the face of mounting opposition. ...
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/sep/28/shell-ceases-alaska-arctic-drilling-exploratory-well-oil-gas-disappoints


Officially it's because they didn't find much oil but privately they admit awareness of widespread opposition...  ;D

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 8320
    • View Profile
Re: Arctic Drilling and Shipping
« Reply #51 on: October 17, 2015, 04:37:21 AM »
Obama administration closes off two avenues for new Arctic drilling
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration moved on several fronts Friday to block new oil drilling in the Arctic Ocean, weeks after Shell said it would be walking away from the area “for the foreseeable future.”

The Interior Department announced it was canceling government auctions of drilling rights in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas, previously scheduled for 2016 and 2017 respectively. At the same time, it formally rejected bids by Statoil and Shell for more time to search for crude under their existing Arctic leases.

The decisions ensure a long chill on oil development in U.S. Arctic waters and deal another blow to Alaska, which heavily depends on energy revenue and is still reeling from Shell’s pullout. Environmentalists celebrated the move as a victory for Arctic waters and the animals that thrive in them.

http://fuelfix.com/blog/2015/10/16/obama-administration-closes-off-two-avenues-for-new-arctic-drilling/
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1840
    • View Profile
Re: Arctic Drilling and Shipping
« Reply #52 on: October 17, 2015, 04:24:22 PM »
Even Russia noticed that the US has canceled Arctic oil drilling lease sales.

https://www.rt.com/usa/318901-us-government-cuts-arctic-drilling/
(With a photo of the unlamented Kulluk that we followed a few years ago)

Even without a quid pro quo from Russia, sanctions, low prices, & low demand, will slow their Arctic drilling.
http://www.ibtimes.com/russian-oil-giant-rosneft-delaying-arctic-drilling-plans-amid-western-sanctions-1800476 

Chevron, ExxonMobil & BP have already given up in the Canadian Arctic & if the Canadian public votes as forecast on Monday, by Tuesday we may have most of North America making decisions we can be proud of.
http://ramenir.com/2015/10/14/will-arctic-drilling-be-left-out-in-the-cold/

Terry

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 8320
    • View Profile
Re: Arctic Drilling and Shipping
« Reply #53 on: May 13, 2016, 12:13:59 AM »
End of this thread?  At least the drilling part!  :)

Big Oil Abandons $2.5 Billion in U.S. Arctic Drilling Rights
After plunking down more than $2.5 billion for drilling rights in U.S. Arctic waters, Royal Dutch Shell Plc, ConocoPhillips and other companies have quietly relinquished claims they once hoped would net the next big oil discovery.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-05-10/big-oil-abandons-2-5-billion-in-u-s-arctic-drilling-rights
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Snek

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: Arctic Drilling and Shipping
« Reply #54 on: May 19, 2016, 10:33:02 AM »
US isn't the only game in town
"Arctic oil drilling: outcry as Norway opens new areas to exploration"
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/19/norway-arctic-new-oil-drilling-licences
« Last Edit: May 19, 2016, 10:52:35 AM by Snek »

Snek

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: Arctic Drilling and Shipping
« Reply #55 on: May 19, 2016, 10:49:13 AM »
Also here is russian news article
http://www.arctic-info.ru/news/17-05-2016/-rosneft_--vlojit-7-3-mlrd-ryblei-v-raboti-na-sel_fe-mora-laptevih
Headline: "Rosneft" will invest 7,3 billion rubels (it's about 100 million us dollars) into extraction of oil in continental shelf of Laptev sea.
In article it is said that Rosneft in 2016-2017 will drill exploration wells in 4 areas of Okhotsk sea and Laptev sea.

P.S. Great forum. I think I will contribute mostly by puting links to relating russian articles translating headlines and giving summation of content. Hope my English is understandable.

Neven

  • Administrator
  • ASIF Governor
  • *****
  • Posts: 3944
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
Re: Arctic Drilling and Shipping
« Reply #56 on: May 19, 2016, 06:13:36 PM »
That'd be great, Snek (released your profile, so post freely). I'm sure many people, myself included, are interested in the Russian perspective on all things Arctic.
Il faut cultiver notre jardin

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 8320
    • View Profile
Re: Arctic Drilling and Shipping
« Reply #57 on: June 19, 2016, 01:09:06 PM »
Scientists Urge Obama to Halt Oil Leasing in the Arctic
In a letter being delivered to the White House on Thursday, nearly 400 scientists from more than a dozen countries are urging President Obama to stop future oil and gas drilling in the Arctic Ocean because of the significant environmental and climate risks associated with further fossil fuels exploration there.

“No new oil and gas leasing or exploration should be allowed in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas in the foreseeable future,” the scientists said.

http://www.climatecentral.org/news/scientists-urge-obama-halt-oil-leasing-arctic-20457
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 8320
    • View Profile
Re: Arctic Drilling and Shipping
« Reply #58 on: December 20, 2016, 11:04:49 PM »
Obama takes new action to ban Arctic drilling
Looking to cement his environmental record, President Barack Obama took new action Tuesday barring offshore drilling in areas of the Arctic and Atlantic oceans indefinitely.

Obama relied on a 63-year-old law to make his moves, which will prevent future leasing of certain offshore areas for oil rights. His successor, Donald Trump, who has promised a policy allowing more US energy production, would face legal challenges if he attempted to reverse Obama's order.

The White House said Obama was declaring the entire US portion of the Chukchi sea and the vast majority of the Beaufort Sea "indefinitely off limits for future oil and gas leasing," citing critical protection for the marine mammals, ecological resources and native populations.

Canada also announced Tuesday that it will freeze its offshore oil and gas exploration in its Arctic waters.

The US is also declaring 31 canyons off the Atlantic coast off-limits for drilling, citing "critical and irreplaceable ecological value."
http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/20/politics/arctic-drilling-ban-obama-trump/index.html
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 8320
    • View Profile
Re: Arctic Drilling and Shipping
« Reply #59 on: December 20, 2016, 11:28:47 PM »
The Canadian statement on the Arctic agreement:

United States-Canada Joint Arctic Leaders’ Statement
“Today, President Obama and Prime Minister Trudeau are proud to launch actions ensuring a strong, sustainable and viable Arctic economy and ecosystem, with low-impact shipping, science based management of marine resources, and free from the future risks of offshore oil and gas activity. Together, these actions set the stage for deeper partnerships with other Arctic nations, including through the Arctic Council....”
http://pm.gc.ca/eng/news/2016/12/20/united-states-canada-joint-arctic-leaders-statement
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Neven

  • Administrator
  • ASIF Governor
  • *****
  • Posts: 3944
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
Re: Arctic Drilling and Shipping
« Reply #60 on: February 21, 2017, 09:46:06 PM »
Traffic on the NSR can reach 75 mln tons to 2025



The traffic on the Northern Transport Corridor that includes arctic seas from the Barents and the White to the Chukchi and the Bering seas can reach 75 mln tons per year to 2025, reported to TASS Mikhail Grigoryev, the member of the Scientific Council of the Russian Academy of Sciences in geology issues and development of oil, gas and coal.

“We have analyzed the extent of companies’ production on approved development projects and seen if applied projects – “Arctic LNG”, shipment of coal from “Chaika” terminal, “Pechora LNG” - are additionally implemented, to 2025 the traffic in the Arctic waters (including the NSR) concerned with the development of mineral resources will reach around 75 mln tons per year”, said Mr. Grigoryev prior to the 2nd International Conference “Arctic-2017”, that takes place on 16-17th of February in Moscow.

As he said, overall traffic on the NSR in 2016 exceed 7 mln tons and in North East passage – 18 mln tons.
Il faut cultiver notre jardin

DrTskoul

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 802
    • View Profile
Re: Arctic Drilling and Shipping
« Reply #61 on: February 22, 2017, 12:49:09 AM »
Only a factor of 10 increase ... lovely
“You can know the name of a bird in all the languages of the world, but when you're finished, you'll know absolutely nothing whatever about the bird... So let's look at the bird and see what it's doing -- that's what counts.”
― Richard P. Feynman

Martin Gisser

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 318
  • alias Mars Joh. P. Florifulgurator
    • View Profile
Re: Arctic Drilling and Shipping
« Reply #62 on: February 22, 2017, 02:05:00 AM »
If anybody still interested in coal by then... Nice Potemkin village for fossil age bankers.
Why is the earth silent at this destruction? (Martin Heidegger ca. 1937)

Archimid

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 626
    • View Profile
Re: Arctic Drilling and Shipping
« Reply #63 on: February 22, 2017, 02:08:47 AM »
I think that as the Arctic becomes ice free the global economy will suffer a great contraction due to climate change. By the time it is ice free, there will be no demand for huge freighters full of stuff. Most Arctic Traffic will be military and under full control of Russia.

Drilling will be completely non competitive. There will not be enough demand.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1840
    • View Profile
Re: Arctic Drilling and Shipping
« Reply #64 on: February 22, 2017, 02:24:11 PM »
I think that as the Arctic becomes ice free the global economy will suffer a great contraction due to climate change. By the time it is ice free, there will be no demand for huge freighters full of stuff. Most Arctic Traffic will be military and under full control of Russia.

Drilling will be completely non competitive. There will not be enough demand.


Didn't Europe recently propose stopping any arctic ship burning bunker oil from docking at her ports?
If enacted this would be a heavy blow to all proposed China/Europe Arctic trade routes.


I'm personally unsure if short trips through the Arctic burning nasty fuel are worse than much longer voyages through the Mid-East burning the same.


Terry

DrTskoul

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 802
    • View Profile
Re: Arctic Drilling and Shipping
« Reply #65 on: February 22, 2017, 08:36:29 PM »
For CO2, mostly amount of fuel burned ( length + efficiency matters) so couldn't either or . For Arctic, dirty fuels lead to more soot/aerosols ... so not good
“You can know the name of a bird in all the languages of the world, but when you're finished, you'll know absolutely nothing whatever about the bird... So let's look at the bird and see what it's doing -- that's what counts.”
― Richard P. Feynman

Adam Ash

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 218
    • View Profile
    • The 100 metre line
Re: Arctic Drilling and Shipping
« Reply #66 on: February 23, 2017, 06:39:04 AM »
Frequently used routes could become self-clearing.  To the passing emission of 50 MW of mechanical energy and eventually heat, they will add a corridor of soot which will hasten melt, encouraging more ships, more soot, more melt, more...

So perhaps the legislation should only allow non-GHG-emitting vessels - nuclear (as long as it lasts), sail and/or solar propelled. 

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1840
    • View Profile
Re: Arctic Drilling and Shipping
« Reply #67 on: February 23, 2017, 08:32:08 PM »
Frequently used routes could become self-clearing.  To the passing emission of 50 MW of mechanical energy and eventually heat, they will add a corridor of soot which will hasten melt, encouraging more ships, more soot, more melt, more...

So perhaps the legislation should only allow non-GHG-emitting vessels - nuclear (as long as it lasts), sail and/or solar propelled.


There was a denier meme a few years back which insisted that the retreating ice being witnessed was simply a function of the wake of icebreakers studying the same.


It seems to me that as soot darkens the albedo, the darkened ice melts & the soot is dumped into the sea. Whether the soot simply sits on a melting floe, or melt water generated by the darkened ice washes it clean, or increased precipitation from atmospheric contact with now open water causes the soot to be buried under snow. The end result being that any visible soot is soon rendered invisible and unable to affect insolation.


In any event the soot and ash from tundra fires should far surpass any marine atmospheric pollution for at least the near future.


Terry

longwalks1

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 53
    • View Profile
Re: Arctic Drilling and Shipping
« Reply #68 on: February 24, 2017, 12:09:40 AM »
Yeah, I knew I had seen it, maybe should have posted it in early February - from Bellona  (a good site and not just good for nuclear and nuclear waste issues - one plucky Norwegian NGO.)

http://bellona.org/news/arctic/2017-02-bellona-seminar-says-old-ship-fuels-should-be-banned-in-the-arctic

TROMSØ­—Bellona has called for a ban on the use of heavy fuel oils in shipping in the Arctic, and said the industry should apply best available technologies to offset costs.

The European Union echoed the sentiment on Friday, voting to adopt a resolution against heavy fuel oils in Arctic shipping lanes.


Yes, mostly amelioration
Right now, that’s bio-condensed natural gas, and hybrid and electric technology. There are others, but it’s important to take the first step – to ban the dirtiest and cheapest fuel – shipping companies must test and apply new technologies.”


Side note :  For the Arctic Frontiers Jan 25-27 that Bellona was part of - there are some science presentations that have pdf's to download.  But you have to dig to find the interesting ones. 

http://www.arcticfrontiers.com/downloads/?drawer=2017*Arctic%20Frontiers%20Science






TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1840
    • View Profile
Re: Arctic Drilling and Shipping
« Reply #69 on: February 24, 2017, 07:46:25 AM »
Longwalks1


I am unclear as to whether the EU has passed this requirement, or is still discussing it.
If you are familiar with the situation can you tell me if any of the icebreakers currently plying Arctic waters are burning the cleaner fuels?
Is the transition from dirty to clean simply a matter of fueling up at the proper pump, or are major modifications required?
Will this have much effect on the costs of shipping, particularly through the NEP?


Thanks
Terry



longwalks1

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 53
    • View Profile
Re: Arctic Drilling and Shipping
« Reply #70 on: February 24, 2017, 02:10:16 PM »
No, I am not familiar.  The EU passed a "resolution"  which is a wish.  The Bellona article does not mention any regulations.  Without major changes in how ships are built (S. Korea, etc) and the other major shipping countries (China, etc.) It will be moot.  Bellona could do a better job of posting upstream raw sources of it's news.  Bellona goes for incremental change and catalyzes enviromental and nuclear clean ups - especially in Russia.  The incremental part here is to start with the cruise lines, with a Norwegian company getting the most benefits for their environmental cruises.

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1840
    • View Profile
Re: Arctic Drilling and Shipping
« Reply #71 on: February 25, 2017, 07:45:07 AM »
Thanks Longwalks1


As a Canadian I've long felt that we let the ball slip as we never spend enough on Arctic infrastructure for the NWP to be in consideration as an alternative Arctic shipping lane. A few stations for repairs, refueling, and emergency rescue might have paid large dividends at some future point.


That opportunity however has passed, now even our sovereignty over the passage is in dispute.
Russia, primarily through default, is now virtually the sole vendor for those wishing a rapid nautical passage between Europe and the East. While some tonnage may pass through the Northern Route, or even one of the North West Passages, no one else has invested in the Nuclear tugs, and few have even considered building the heavy conventional icebreakers that I'm sure Lloyd's will consider a necessity.


Having ceded this to the Russians, it would appear rather mean spirited to then impose our own regulations for shipping in their waters. As long as the Russians are on board with these proposals, I have no objections. If however this is an attempt to unilaterally and retroactively punish an entity after they have invested $Billions, then I can't support it. I just now learned that the Russians  have been pushing for the compliance of other nations with the MARPOL Annex VI provisions which limits sulfur content in marine fuel. They also have been developing LPG bunkering for domestic shipping, so it seems as though they will be on board for anything that cleans up arctic shipping. My worries were for naught.


http://en.portnews.ru/news/229661/


Shipping costs have crashed so in recent years that they can almost be removed from the ledger, except for shipments of very inexpensive bulk goods. However, my understanding is that many of the world's largest shipping companies are not doing at all well financially, and that downsizing and mergers are now taking place.


The New Silk Road, with high speed rail linking the East and West without a nautical link is still just over the horizon. Even when this is in place a market will exist for the cheap transport of unrefined raw materials to feed China's factories, and return shipments of the inexpensive do-dahs we've come to expect. Nations that willfully raise the costs of this trade will find their exports of raw material and their imports of finished goods lagging behind those entities that aren't so hobbled.


Speed of passage may also be of concern. Would there be a premium for the fast shipment of wheat, rice, or produce, in times of regional food shortage? Would additional weeks under Egypt's blazing sky require refrigeration costs not a concern for produce following in an icebreaker's wake?


The truly gargantuan hulls that escape size restrictions forced by canals and locks will require the safest routes for their passage. Few would dare the rugged, twisting NWP, or even the open but remote NP, when for a few dollars more a passage can be arraigned with repair facilities, rescue facilities, and the world's only fleet of Nuclear icebreakers.


This link, Norwegian from 2015


http://commons.wmu.se/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1062&context=shiparc


indicates that fuel savings, even using the smaller Suezmax hulls are much larger than I had imagined. 62% less fuel over a route that is <50% the distance, on a voyage that takes 40% less time.
It's difficult to argue that an addition of 8,438 tons of CO2 per round trip could be beneficial, regardless of whether this was spewed out in the Arctic or the Mediterranean Sea.


The cost savings is also greater than I would have thought. From $16.70/ton through the Suez to
$14.5 for the NEP. 13% could be one hell of a bump in profitability.


I was unaware of the magnitude of the advantages possible when the NEP is utilized.


Thanks so much for addressing the whole subject.
Terry


Tor Bejnar

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1480
    • View Profile
Re: Arctic Drilling and Shipping
« Reply #72 on: July 19, 2017, 08:42:46 PM »
Sad news:
Interior considering 3 Beaufort Sea projects
Margaret Kriz Hobson, E&E News reporter
Published: Tuesday, July 11, 2017
The Trump administration is expected to roll out the red carpet for three oil development projects in the Arctic Ocean, all of which are located in a sliver of the Beaufort Sea that was excluded from former President Obama's Arctic drilling ban.

The Interior Department is set to announce tomorrow whether Eni US Operating Co. Inc. can explore for oil on its federal Nikaitchuq North leases off Alaska's northeastern shore.

The company, a subsidiary of Italian multinational Eni SpA, is proposing to drill horizontal wells under the seabed to reach its federal leases. Those wells would be drilled from Spy Island, where Eni operates an oil facility in state of Alaska waters. If approved by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, the company could begin drilling four wells this December.

Interior also is considering whether to give the Arctic Slope Regional Corp. more time to decide whether to drill on leases it received from Royal Dutch Shell PLC after Shell dropped out of U.S. Arctic oil development in 2015. Those leases are located in federal waters north of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and west of the Native village of Kaktovik.

Early this year ASRC Exploration LLC, a subsidiary of the Native-owned company, filed a request for a suspension of operations on those leases. Since then, the subsidiary, known as AEX, has also provided a detailed plan for developing those Arctic leases.




"If they give us a reasonable schedule for getting these leases developed, then we can grant them the time to do that," explained Mark Fesmire, director of the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement's Alaska office. "We are considering that right now."

BSEE has already approved AEX's request to administratively combine the former Shell leases into a single tract now known as the Taktuk Unit. That decision applies to 20 of the 21 leases acquired from Shell. One of the leases was excluded because the company didn't provide enough information proving that it is geologically related to the other lands.

By unitizing the leases, the company will have greater flexibility to drill on any or all of the leases. "Drilling on one is the legal equivalent of doing lease holding activities on any of the other leases in the unit," Fesmire said. As a result, regulators can "treat that unit as one exploratory project."

The Trump administration is also considering a third oil exploration project, this one submitted by Hilcorp Alaska to develop its offshore Liberty leases. Those lands, located northeast of the oil industry town of Deadhorse, are jointly owned by BP.

BOEM is putting the finishing touches on a draft environmental impact statement for the Liberty project, which could be released later this month.

Under Hilcorp's 2014 development plan for Liberty, the company is proposing to build its drilling and processing facility on a man-made gravel island located 6 miles from shore.

Waters omitted from Obama ban

These three Beaufort Sea oil proposals are located in the 2.8-million-acre region that was omitted from Obama's Arctic withdrawal plan after Alaska state officials lobbied the White House to allow continued energy development in the oil-rich waters (Energywire, Jan. 17).

This roughly 200-mile-long region is located between the native communities of Utqiagvik (formerly Barrow) and Kaktovik, between tracts of land that the two villages rely on for subsistence whaling.

Beaufort Sea oil has been flowing into the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System since 1987 when production began at the Endicott field. The operation is located on an artificial island 3 miles off the shore and 15 miles east of Prudhoe Bay.

In October 2001, production began at a second offshore site, the Northstar field. That operation, located 12 miles northwest of Prudhoe Bay, was also built on a man-made island.

Hilcorp is currently the operator and majority owner of both facilities.
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

Tor Bejnar

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1480
    • View Profile
Re: Arctic Drilling and Shipping
« Reply #73 on: July 19, 2017, 08:53:12 PM »
         He wasn't scared when World War III was declared
         He wasn't scared
         No sir-ee
              Tom Lehrer

Now The U.S. Coast Guard Wants Cruise Missiles On Its Icebreakers Too
By Tyler Rogoway - May 22, 2017
As Russia is building literally a new armada of new icebreakers, ice-capable supply ships, a massive arctic "research" submarine and icebreaker surface combatants armed with cruise missiles, the Pentagon is now looking at arming its relatively tiny fleet of future icebreakers with similar weapons as well.

The revelation came during a House subcommittee on Homeland Security hearing where Coast Guard Commandant Admiral Paul Zukunft was discussing the service's plans to build three new medium icebreakers, with the first delivery occurring by 2023. A major design study is underway now and the nature of the icebreaker's capabilities still remain up for debate, but the ability to add heavy weapons is something USCG is now interested in
...
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1840
    • View Profile
Re: Arctic Drilling and Shipping
« Reply #74 on: July 24, 2017, 09:08:25 PM »
Jeez, there's nothing like a good arms race to sop up all that excess cash!


I just hope and pray that Canada has enough deck space on her aged icebreakers for some truly impressive armament.


Can F-35's be modified for skis?
Terry