Month: April 2017

Will Major North Sea Discovery Revive UK Oil Industry?

Will Major North Sea Discovery Revive UK Oil Industry?

via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)
http://www.thegwpf.com

On March 27, Hurricane Energy, a small-cap energy company based in the UK, announced a major oil discovery near the Shetland Islands, a discovery that is being described as one of the largest in UK waters this century.

hurricne-locations

Hurricane drilled the “Halifax Well” near its existing Lancaster oil field, and the results were very positive for Hurricane. The hydrocarbon column stretches over 1 kilometer in depth and it could hold enough oil to make it “the largest undeveloped discovery on the UK Continental Shelf.”

The massive discovery is likely to spark interest from much larger drillers. Royal Dutch Shell and BP recently won exploration licenses in the areas not far from the discovery. Hurricane Energy’s find raises questions about the possibility of a revival in the fortunes in the UK waters and even the North Sea, which has declined in both importance and production for the better part of two decades.

Declines in the UK Continental Shelf

Producing oil in the rough waters in the UK Continental Shelf and the North Sea is expensive. The oil fields are mature and have been in decline for years, making ongoing operations costlier and less attractive. The UK’s oil production peaked in 1999 at roughly 3 million barrels per day (mbd), falling to about 1 mbd today.

The collapse of oil prices beginning in mid-2014 was an enormous blow to the North Sea and its surrounding areas, hitting the industry harder than elsewhere. In a global market in which investment dollars have become increasingly scarce, the North Sea and UK offshore production have struggled to compete against cheap oil in the Middle East, lower risk and short-cycle U.S. shale, and even expensive offshore oil fields in relatively less explored places like South America, West Africa or the Eastern Mediterranean, where the upside potential is much larger.

Recent metrics have not looked good. Companies that produce in UK waters have seen ballooning debt positions, according to Oil & Gas UK, an industry trade group. Total expenditure on the UK Continental Shelf has fallen for several years, down from £26.6 billion in 2014 to £19 billion in 2016. Greenfield development is also down, with only one project moving forward last year compared to five in 2015. Brownfield development does not appear much better, with the number of projects approved falling to five last year, compared to ten in 2015. The decline in investment has led to the loss of 120,000 jobs. Ultimately, rising debt for companies in the UK could delay any new investment resulting from a rebound in prices.

The UK’s decision to leave the European Union adds additional challenges for the oil industry, according to Oil & Gas UK. The withdrawal from the EU will be a distraction for an industry struggling to find its footing; the industry could also lose influence over policy development in Brussels; political uncertainty may deter investment; and the loss of access to the EU common market could make the procurement of goods and services trickier, depending on the outcome of future trade negotiations between the UK and the EU. All of that will occur before another potential referendum on Scottish independence, which could raise sovereignty questions regarding North Sea oil fields.

A North Sea rebound?

But there are signs that the UK oil industry is turning a corner. The cost to produce a barrel of oil in the UK’s waters has plunged by nearly half since 2014, falling from $29.30 per barrel to $16 per barrel by 2016. As a result of these efficiency gains, “there has not been a widespread rush to cease production on the UK Continental Shelf (UKCS) as may have otherwise been expected,” Oil & Gas UK said in its 2016 Economic Report.

Moreover, oil drillers are squeezing more oil out of existing fields. In 2015, output jumped by 10.4 percent, the first increase in over 15 years. The trend continued into last year, with production up 5.7 percent in the first half of the year compared to the same period in 2015.

Full post

via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF) http://www.thegwpf.com

March 31, 2017 at 09:25PM

Is the regionality of the little ice-age proof against CO2 warming?

Is the regionality of the little ice-age proof against CO2 warming?

via Scottish Sceptic
http://ift.tt/1wv5Sjx

Reading the official mouthpiece of the Greenblob (wikipedia) I read: The NASA Earth Observatory notes three particularly cold intervals: one beginning about 1650, another about 1770, and the last in 1850, all separated by intervals of slight warming. “Little Ice … Continue reading

via Scottish Sceptic http://ift.tt/1wv5Sjx

March 31, 2017 at 09:10PM

Experts call for ‘Red Teams’ to challenge UN climate science panel 

Experts call for ‘Red Teams’ to challenge UN climate science panel 

via Tallbloke’s Talkshop
http://ift.tt/1WIzElD

Image credit: NASA

Basing all government climate research funding on one narrow theory was never a smart policy.
H/T GWPF

Prominent scientists operating outside the scientific consensus on climate change urged Congress on Wednesday to fund “red teams” to investigate “natural” causes of global warming and challenge the findings of the United Nations’ climate science panel.

The suggestion for a counter-investigative science force – or red team approach – was presented in prepared testimony by scientists known for questioning the influence of human activity on global warming.

It comes at a time when President Donald Trump and other members of the administration have expressed doubt about the accepted science of climate change, and are considering drastic cuts to federal funding for scientific research.

A main mission of red teams would be to challenge the scientific consensus on climate change, including the work of the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, whose reports are widely considered the authority on climate science.

“One way to aid Congress in understanding more of the climate issue than what is produced by biased ‘official’ panels of the climate establishment is to organize and fund credible ‘red teams’ that look at issues such as natural variability, the failure of climate models and the huge benefits to society from affordable energy, carbon-based and otherwise,” said witness John Christy, an atmospheric scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, in his prepared testimony. “I would expect such a team would offer to Congress some very different conclusions regarding the human impacts on climate.”

Wednesday’s hearing, which focused on “the scientific method and process as it relates to climate change” is the latest in a series of recent House science committee hearings to challenge the existence or seriousness of climate change.

In their prepared testimonies Wednesday, witnesses called by the committee’s Republican majority suggested that organizations such as the IPCC present a biased view of climate change, and do not represent the views of the entire scientific community. They argued that policymakers would benefit from assembling groups of experts to conduct assessments that challenge the accepted climate narrative.

“A scientist’s job is to continually challenge his/her own biases and ask ‘How could I be wrong?’” Judith Curry, professor emeritus at Georgia Tech’s School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences and president of the Climate Forecast Applications Network, said in her own testimony.

“Playing ‘devil’s advocate’ helps a scientist examine how their conclusions might be misguided and how they might be wrong. Overcoming one’s own biases is difficult; an external devil’s advocate can play a useful role in questioning and criticizing the logic of the argument.” Curry also suggested that red teams or similar panels presenting diverse opinions on climate change could take on this role.

Red teams are special groups designed to improve an organization’s performance by assuming the role of a rival, challenger or devil’s advocate. They have sometimes been used by agencies such as the CIA and the Defense Department to help test out security operations or military tactics by assuming the role of enemies, hackers or foreign governments.

Full report: Experts Call For The Creation Of ‘Red Teams’ To Challenge UN Climate Science Panel | The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)

via Tallbloke’s Talkshop http://ift.tt/1WIzElD

March 31, 2017 at 08:51PM

Pause for thought

Pause for thought

via Scottish Sceptic
http://ift.tt/1wv5Sjx

(Sorry not an April fool – I was planning something but I was making such progress I didn’t have time to complete). After examining the temperature records with a view to creating a single “reliable” record, I realised that something … Continue reading

via Scottish Sceptic http://ift.tt/1wv5Sjx

March 31, 2017 at 08:40PM