Just when you thought FF couldnt do more damage

pragmatic1

Wonder if he can find a few gold mines to give away before he leaves office.

http://insideireland.ie/2011/02/15/onshore-oil-licenses-announced-8503/


A former member of the Statoil board called Conor Lenihan naive. She said that Norway was “very lucky to have had some strong politicians who planned for the future”. I love this country but sometimes I wonder are we really capable of governing ourselves.

paul71

The article does not give any details of the deal done, so we cannot judge if it was good or bad. Any other links on this?

Son Of A Vidic

paul71 wrote: »

The article does not give any details of the deal done, so we cannot judge if it was good or bad. Any other links on this?

Knowing our track record, we've probably self-shafted ourselves again.

Scofflaw

It looks like a pure exploration licence, so the 'deal' will be the current standard deal for oil and gas exploitation if anything is discovered.

Personally, given the ease of onshore exploration, I'd prefer to see something more stringent, as well as some very tight definitions on how the oil companies can operate. That, by the way, is where the comment on Lenihan being 'naive' comes from - it has nothing to do with the tax regime, because that has nothing to do with Conor Lenihan:

A FORMER board member of Norwegian oil and gas company Statoil has advised that the appointment of a new ombudsman trusted by “all stakeholders” may be the only route to resolution of the Corrib gas dispute in north Mayo.

However, the Government should never have permitted construction of the gas infrastructure in the current location, Stein Bredal, a former trade union representative on Statoil’s board, said in Galway at the weekend. Statoil is a partner with Shell and Vermilion Energy in the Corrib gas project.

Mr Bredal also said that Minister of State for Natural Resources Conor Lenihan was “naive” to state that a BP Gulf of Mexico-type incident could not happen in Irish waters.

Mr Bredal spent 25 years working on offshore rigs. He took a keen interest in health and safety following the capsize of the Alexander L Kielland semi-submersible drilling rig on the Norwegian Ekofisk oilfield in March 1980, killing 123 people. He had been due to fly out to start a shift on the rig when the capsize occurred.

“Accidents do happen, even in Norway with our experience and tight regulation,” he said.

Mr Bredal was elected to Statoil’s board as representative of the Federation of Offshore Workers’ Trade Unions in 2000 and served until 2006.

He also unsuccessfully opposed the semi-privatisation of Statoil, as he believed semi-privatisation would dilute the emphasis on social responsibility. “Statoil’s approach in Norway was to ask the community first what it wanted from a project, and to listen,” Mr Bredal said. “It was only when it joined with BP to work in other countries that it moved away from this model.”

Source: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0712/1224274512343.html

I have to say he's entirely right there. It's insane to head into onshore petroleum development without tying down the responsibility of the companies to the communities involved (and the surrounding environment) - something I strongly doubt we've even approached, and more than we have Coastal Zone Management plans, or proper flood plain planning, or any other attitude to planning generally other than "let 'er rip boys!". If there's anything worth exploiting they'll be heading into another S2S situation - or worse, an S2S situation without any protests.

gloomily,
Scofflaw

TheInquisitor

Scofflaw wrote: »

It looks like a pure exploration licence, so the 'deal' will be the current standard deal for oil and gas exploitation if anything is discovered.

Personally, given the ease of onshore exploration, I'd prefer to see something more stringent, as well as some very tight definitions on how the oil companies can operate. That, by the way, is where the comment on Lenihan being 'naive' comes from - it has nothing to do with the tax regime, because that has nothing to do with Conor Lenihan:


gloomily,
Scofflaw

Scofflaw Ireland does not produce 1 single barrel of oil per day. Not one! We import every single one. We should be encouraging everyone to come here and explore to see if there is in fact any worth while deposits.

As is always the case , the first person who takes the big risks get more rewards. After we've proved there's abundant oil in and around Ireland we can talk about taxing it further. But right now we have no infrastructure such as pipelines in the country.

Look at what happened at the corrib gas find. In what other country in the world would it take 7 years from the start to develop a field and 2.5 billion. I mean what a terrible reputation we've given ourselves. By world standards this is only a medium sized field.

Scofflaw

TheInquisitor wrote: »

Scofflaw Ireland does not produce 1 single barrel of oil per day. Not one! We import every single one. We should be encouraging everyone to come here and explore to see if there is in fact any worth while deposits.

As is always the case , the first person who takes the big risks get more rewards. After we've proved there's abundant oil in and around Ireland we can talk about taxing it further. But right now we have no infrastructure such as pipelines in the country.

Look at what happened at the corrib gas find. In what other country in the world would it take 7 years from the start to develop a field and 2.5 billion. I mean what a terrible reputation we've given ourselves. By world standards this is only a medium sized field.

Oh, I appreciate all that - and have yards of posts to prove it. However, what I'm saying, and where I agree with the Statoil guy, is that when it comes to allowing onshore drilling, Ireland is showing every sign of going at it the same way they go at every piece of development - let her rip, and devil take the hindmost. Environment wha'? Community huh? Safety ye what now? Planning for the future the who's whelp what? Geddup the yard with that hippy shtuff!

What the Norwegian guy is saying is that Norway looked at how oil money could be used to develop the country in ways other than through simply creating an oil industry, and how oil-related development could serve the people rather than the companies. It's not a case that either we nationalise everything and tell the oil companies to take a hike or we let them do what they like.

If someone asks permission to dig out a valuable seam of minerals in your garden, there are more choices than doing it yourself or letting him do what he likes - and more options than just telling him to give you half the profits and then letting him do what he likes. If the oil companies find something they want to develop, then we tell them how they can develop it, because we own the resource. We set the safety rules, we set the planning constraints - but we tend instead to regard such things as possibly damaging obstacles in the way of an opportunity to make a few swift golden ones.

That's where the naivety of the Irish government circles comes in - or maybe it's just laziness, or ignorance. Other people have gone through this, and a refusal to learn their lessons is one of those pigheaded applications of Irish exceptionalism that regularly leave us up to our knees in someone else's shit.

cordially,
Scofflaw

TheInquisitor

Scofflaw wrote: »

Oh, I appreciate all that - and have yards of posts to prove it. However, what I'm saying, and where I agree with the Statoil guy, is that when it comes to allowing onshore drilling, Ireland is showing every sign of going at it the same way they go at every piece of development - let her rip, and devil take the hindmost. Environment wha'? Community huh? Safety ye what now? Planning for the future the who's whelp what? Geddup the yard with that hippy shtuff!

What the Norwegian guy is saying is that Norway looked at how oil money could be used to develop the country in ways other than through simply creating an oil industry, and how oil-related development could serve the people rather than the companies. It's not a case that either we nationalise everything and tell the oil companies to take a hike or we let them do what they like.

If someone asks permission to dig out a valuable seam of minerals in your garden, there are more choices than doing it yourself or letting him do what he likes - and more options than just telling him to give you half the profits and then letting him do what he likes. If the oil companies find something they want to develop, then we tell them how they can develop it, because we own the resource. We set the safety rules, we set the planning constraints - but we tend instead to regard such things as possibly damaging obstacles in the way of an opportunity to make a few swift golden ones.

That's where the naivety of the Irish government circles comes in - or maybe it's just laziness, or ignorance. Other people have gone through this, and a refusal to learn their lessons is one of those pigheaded applications of Irish exceptionalism that regularly leave us up to our knees in someone else's shit.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Scofflaw this is a load of crap. How the hell am i meant to argue with you when i agree with everything you just said.

The funny thing is , thinking about it if the government had all the proper safest aspects and rules set at least then Shell would have known the rules to the game and paid accordingly and gotten the infrastructure built in a few years. Instead because the line kept moving they couldn't plan properly and it leads to the mess that happened.

Scofflaw

TheInquisitor wrote: »

Scofflaw this is a load of crap. How the hell am i meant to argue with you when i agree with everything you just said.

I'm an annoyingly reasonable bastard sometimes...seriously, though, I may object to people claiming there's untold trillions in oil off the west coast that's being hidden by the oil companies even though we apparently gave it all to them years ago for free...but that doesn't mean I'm on the side of the oil companies. I'm just on the side of reality, and the reality is that if we have got oil, we'd better damn well plan for the consequences - because, as you say:

TheInquisitor wrote: »

The funny thing is , thinking about it if the government had all the proper safest aspects and rules set at least then Shell would have known the rules to the game and paid accordingly and gotten the infrastructure built in a few years. Instead because the line kept moving they couldn't plan properly and it leads to the mess that happened.

If we have oil, the oil companies will want it. If we say "OK, but you have to abide by this and this", they'll say "fair enough". They're not evil for fun, they're just OK with making a mess if nobody insists they don't, if that's what's cheaper. If being tidier is more cost-effective, or required by law before they can get to the oil, they'll do that instead. It's just business.

cordially,
Scofflaw

flutered

funnily enough the oil companys seem to be the only industary that is not overly regulated, try opening a corner shop, a small garage, even trying to start a mini garden centre, if my strenght holds up i hope to start a very small industary on my own employing no one if it gets off the ground i am wondering how long it will take before it is engulfed in red tape and have to close.

Birdnuts

TheInquisitor wrote: »

Look at what happened at the corrib gas find. In what other country in the world would it take 7 years from the start to develop a field and 2.5 billion. I mean what a terrible reputation we've given ourselves. By world standards this is only a medium sized field.

Cry me a river - If SHELL and their mates in the Irish estaiblishment had processed the field offshore(thereby avoiding the Bellanaboy/Rossport planning fiasco) as per the industry standard, the gas would be flowing for years by now and they could have taken advantage of the price spikes in 07/08. As it is world gas prices continue to slump and will continue FTFF according to industry experts on the back of a world supply glut as massive new fields continue to be discovered(as highlighted by fact that the US will soon be a net exporter of gas thanx to new technology that can access shale deposits). Although knowing this country, the thick Paddies will probably pay an added subsidy to SHELL to make up for this:rolleyes:

Birdnuts

flutered wrote: »

funnily enough the oil companys seem to be the only industary that is not overly regulated,

Big Money talks - the likes of SHELL, BP and Exxon all have long and ugly histories to prove that:(

Scofflaw

Birdnuts wrote: »

Cry me a river - If SHELL and their mates in the Irish estaiblishment had processed the field offshore(thereby avoiding the Bellanaboy/Rossport planning fiasco) as per the industry standard, the gas would be flowing for years by now and they could have taken advantage of the price spikes in 07/08. As it is world gas prices continue to slump and will continue FTFF according to industry experts on the back of a world supply glut as massive new fields continue to be discovered(as highlighted by fact that the US will soon be a net exporter of gas thanx to new technology that can access shale deposits). Although knowing this country, the thick Paddies will probably pay an added subsidy to SHELL to make up for this:rolleyes:

Massive new fields are not being discovered. This is the rate of discovery:



This is proven gas reserves:



What dictates pricing is production, not reserves:



And demand:



Essentially, production rates compared to demand is what determines price, but increasing production rates on top of stable or declining reserves simply means exhausting reserves faster.

cordially,
Scofflaw