East Coast: Oil Drilling

Offshore
21

[QUOTE=Bayrunner;136466]I think he is talking about the stuff the Navy does offshore like live fire and maneuvering exercises. And yes look at all of the stuff right here in town that is unused. Lamberts Pt docks, PMT, NNMT, the old railroad docks at Little Creek. And thats just here. Philly and Charleston have all of those old navy docks.[/QUOTE]

You have a good point about the available pier space, throw in the Jerry Talton piers if they ever activate or move the Kocak etc I’m sure the owner would love the business.

But I don’t know that drilling operations would necessarily interfere with the Navy, they manage pretty nicely in So Cal.

22

I’m assuming you’ve never been to Fourchon or gone through the hole in the wall. Because if you have, you would understand that throwing some navy ships and large commercial traffic into the mix would make for a rather large cluster. And don’t forget about the choppers.

23

[QUOTE=gulf_engineer;136469]I’m assuming you’ve never been to Fourchon or gone through the hole in the wall. Because if you have, you would understand that throwing some navy ships and large commercial traffic into the mix would make for a rather large cluster. And don’t forget about the choppers.[/QUOTE]

I took a look at AIS traffic in that area and your point is very well taken. It would need a lot of coordination between all parties for things to work near Hampton Roads.

My Gulf experience is one rig visit and two hitches on a NOAA ship so I don’t have the personal perspective you have.

24

The mud boat driver might have to gasp, use a VTS system or proper radio etiquette! Gasp!

25

There will be no new drilling off the East Coast until a reasonable period of time after Obama leaves office ---- at least 2018 to 2020.

By that time Shell and BP will probably be drilling in Canadian blocks that they have leased in deep water outside the shelf near Georges Bank (about 200 miles south of Halifax and 300 miles east of Boston). It will be interesting to see what they find.

If they they find a lot of oil on the Canadian side (current estimates are 9 billion barrels), There will be a lot of political pressure to also open the area on the US side of the border to drilling. The US environment, especially Georges Bank, will already be at some risk from Canadian drilling, so it will be easier to accept the risk of US drilling in that area. Otherwise, It may well be another 50 years before drilling is allowed on the East Coast.

The best support base for drilling this area of the US East Coast would be in Nova Scotia. The second best support base would be back at Davisville, as in the 70’s and early 80’s. The distance from Davisville to the deep water off Georges on the Canadian border is about the same as the distance to Baltimore Canyon. I do not see drilling off Virginia ( or anywhere south of that) until oil has been found on the US side of the Canadian border. It seems most likely that exploratory drilling in Baltimore Canyon would be supported out of Davisville until sufficient oil is found to justfy building a new support base in the Chesapeake area (or further south).

If a new President is successful at mending our frayed “special relationship” with Canada and approving the Keystone XL pipeline, US mariners might find some opportunities to work in the booming Canadian offshore oil patch long before the US East Coast provides many jobs. Canada already has a labor shortage. If the Canadian offshore oil patch takes off, as it very well might, they will not have enough boats or Canadian mariners to do all the work.

I think it possible that I might have an opportunity to work in Canada, but really doubt that there will be much, if any, US East Coast drilling before I am too old.

If the Republicans don’t figure out how to win an election pretty damn quick, we’ll probably have eight more years of Hillary in the Whitehouse and no new drilling off the East Coast before 2025.

26

And ultimately the states have say on whether to ban drilling as well if in not mistaken. What states are more conservative and Pro-drilling than that of Virginia and to the south? I see northern states being more opposed to oil business minus some.

I understand they’re hasn’t been drilling yet to the south so I know it may be a risk. What would be the advantage to being closer to deep water as you say the northeast has an advantage? Near shore shallow banks would be of bigger advantage since the equipment required is cheaper and less complex right? Next year the seismograph boats start scanning and will really shed light on east coast drilling.

27

[QUOTE=gulf_engineer;136453]Y’all had bigger balls back in the day.[/QUOTE]

It would be a sad statement to say we had bigger balls. I sailed with some outstanding engineers,seamen and boat handlers. Most went out of their way to train the young guys coming up if they showed enough interest. I can remember a transition when guys stopped training on the job and started relying on courses.

28

Both of VA’s Senators are in favor of offshore drilling. I think our Gov is too, if he isnt its for political reasons as he is a Klinton crony. The state assembly is fully behind it.

29

An operation in an area near navy & marine ops would not(could not) interfere. And comparing any east coast port to fourchon is well , foolish. The growth aspect is way off the mark. One dock like a …ahem…ah let’s say. V- port. Would support quite a few rigs and platforms. Boats on lay time would anchor like they do in Brazil .

30

I am not so much comparing the ports, but actually comparing what is going in and out. Most captains navigating Fourchon are mainly used to being the only show in town. No need to call and ask for permission to enter the port, or wait in an anchorage. There would be a large learning curve I believe. It would be a reality check for a crew boat captain that thinks he can over take a large navy ship and try to do so without so much as a peep on the radio. I feel like he would loose that battle. Radio etiquette would need some real work.

31

Those that came to work in Alaska were indoctrinated into other ports like Everett, Wa and Dutch harbor where there are the same hurdles. Military and Commercial traffic. And you are correct there was a learning curve, no doubt. The bottom line is that the function is not BEYOND those involved. It’s pretty easy to determine if someone is not cut out to operate (on a base level) in areas were you have to meet alternate criteria than you may see in GOM. Proper navigation and adherence the local laws are not overlooked. If you are required to call Marine Traffic you’d better or your ability to operate in that area is removed. Anyone that’s operated up the Mississippi will attest. You don’t make the proper calls at the proper points on the river you’ll be met by someone. Same goes for other harbors. the old saying “when in Rome, do as the Romans”

32

As far as the east coast offshore naval ops goes, which i have been a part of for two years, the biggest concern to traffic is usually target ops. An area approximately ten miles by ten miles will be closed for a day at the most. These areas (not many) are well offshore, perimeters are broadcast and are easily avoided, also the timing is very infrequent. I don’t see it as much of a problem. There are other operations such as training exercises that will involve a small fleet of ships with visible aircraft activity close by, probably wouldn’t want to get in there either. The sport fishing fleets don’t seem to have problems, I think it needs to be said that some of these ships will not show on your radar at times. When transiting from or to Chesapeake Bay, the big naval ships will stay in the main part of Thimble Shoals Channel as will the larger commercial ships. On each side, there is an auxillary channel for smaller inbound or outbound traffic. Sometimes a high profile asset like a sub will have escorts ( sharks ) who are visible and direct any traffic that concerns them. That’s about it, not much to be concerned of but enough to be aware of.

33

[QUOTE=tugsailor;136478]There will be no new drilling off the East Coast until a reasonable period of time after Obama leaves office ---- at least 2018 to 2020.

By that time Shell and BP will probably be drilling in Canadian blocks that they have leased in deep water outside the shelf near Georges Bank (about 200 miles south of Halifax and 300 miles east of Boston). It will be interesting to see what they find.

If they they find a lot of oil on the Canadian side (current estimates are 9 billion barrels), There will be a lot of political pressure to also open the area on the US side of the border to drilling. The US environment, especially Georges Bank, will already be at some risk from Canadian drilling, so it will be easier to accept the risk of US drilling in that area. Otherwise, It may well be another 50 years before drilling is allowed on the East Coast.

The best support base for drilling this area of the US East Coast would be in Nova Scotia. The second best support base would be back at Davisville, as in the 70’s and early 80’s. The distance from Davisville to the deep water off Georges on the Canadian border is about the same as the distance to Baltimore Canyon. I do not see drilling off Virginia ( or anywhere south of that) until oil has been found on the US side of the Canadian border. It seems most likely that exploratory drilling in Baltimore Canyon would be supported out of Davisville until sufficient oil is found to justfy building a new support base in the Chesapeake area (or further south).

If a new President is successful at mending our frayed “special relationship” with Canada and approving the Keystone XL pipeline, US mariners might find some opportunities to work in the booming Canadian offshore oil patch long before the US East Coast provides many jobs. Canada already has a labor shortage. If the Canadian offshore oil patch takes off, as it very well might, they will not have enough boats or Canadian mariners to do all the work.

I think it possible that I might have an opportunity to work in Canada, but really doubt that there will be much, if any, US East Coast drilling before I am too old.

If the Republicans don’t figure out how to win an election pretty damn quick, we’ll probably have eight more years of Hillary in the Whitehouse and no new drilling off the East Coast before 2025.[/QUOTE]

What is the source of information on 9 billion bbls ? Just curious.

Good US basing (port / rail/ transport /industrial land) would likely be Portsmouth, NH or Portland, ME v. Davisville for Georges Bank efforts in the Canadian sector.

Saves the trip around Nantucket Shoals.

Davisville may have been used before, because the 80’s exploratory drilling was on the SE part of Georges Bank, v. the alleged current interest further northeast.

Accordingly, the route made sense, and no meaningful investment was needed for Davisville port infrastructure.

Support south can be out of Norfolk or Newport News today.
No investment needed.
Pierspace there is going begging.

34

If drilling is allowed and large commercial quantities of oil are found on the East Coast, port facilities will become available, and the Navy will cooperate. Especially given the strategic defense aspects of having a strong economy with an adequate domestic oil supply.

It would take many years of drilling on a massive scale to create anything approaching the traffic level at Fouchon.

I am not aware that state approval is required to drill in federal waters. If so, is that limited to the shelf or would it also include deep ocean waters over 200 miles offshore, such as the prospect near the Canadian border?

35

I recall reading that the Province of Nova Scotia estimated 9 billion barrels of oil in the deep water blocks it leased to Shell and BP. I’m not sure now, a year later, where I saw it.

The closest support base for US drilling off the Northeast Part of Georges would be on the South Shore of Nova Scotia. I imagine some sort of free trade zone could be set up to facilitate it. The economy there needs anything it can get. Another economically depressed possibility is Eastport, Maine.

36

[QUOTE=tugsailor;136504].

The closest support base for US drilling off the Northeast Part of Georges would be on the South Shore of Nova Scotia. I imagine some sort of free trade zone could be set up to facilitate it. The economy there needs anything it can get. Another economically depressed possibility is Eastport, Maine.[/QUOTE]

Yes, I understand that. Home waters.

However Eastport has limited facilities and difficult transport links. Portsmouth / Kittery & Portland much better. Searsport okay, but still, rather small roads.

As for industrial scale, look further south, or Halifax, not Yarmouth or Shelburne, NS.

37

Eastport I don’t see as likely. Rockland, and Searsport (Sears Isl) Portland might be but it’s a ways away.
Ellsworth and Bucksport are possibles as they are not as hobbled with Panam Rail as Portland is. Highway is better to Portland and not really all that bad to either Rockland or Searsport.
You might see some sort of trade Agreement but I’d say you’ll see more shore base work out of Maine. Just my thoughts and opinions only.

38

Don’t make that assumption about VA. We have a lucrative oceanfront tourist trade here, and the last time the subject was approached it was not received well by the Chambers of Commerce and the public.

39

They did not find any commercial quantities of oil or gas when they drilled on the Southeast Part of Georges and in Baltimore Canyon in the last 70s and early 80s. It was in relatively shallow water up on the shelf. As I recall, we worked in 200 to 300 feet on Georges. Some say that they found nothing at all, but others say that they found promising indications. I don’ know, but I suspect that they most likely found damn little.

Before there is drilling on the East Coast, they first will have to do geophysical work that identifies some promising prospects. That is a big if. There is no reason to think that they will find promising prospects everywhere. More likely, there will be a few discrete areas that show the most promise. Who knows where those might be? The oil formed long before there were any political boundaries.

Since the Canadians have already leased oil exploration blocks for billions of dollars to Shell and BP, it seems most like that they will drill on the Canadian side of the border long before we drill on this side. If the Canadians do find a lot of oil, that will be a good reason to explore similar geologic structures nearby on our side of the border. If we find large commercial quantities of oil too, then that may be the birth of an oil industry that will spread south down the coast. If East Coast drilling is going to be allowed, it seems like the area along the Canadian border would be the first place.

Another reason to drill in deep water off Georges first, is that any oil spill is unlikely to come ashore in the US, more likely it would wash up in Ireland. The same would probably be true for drilling east of the Gulfstream off Virginia. A spill west of the Gulfstream off Virginia would most likely come ashore in the most heavily populated and wealthiest area of the US. So I would be surprised to see drilling off Virginia come first.

40

In the mean time, sitting in the middle of Penobscot Bay is North America’s first and only offshore wind turbine, the Volturnus:

jqqb9d.jpg800×604

Could there be a future for us in that type of technology instead of oil drilling on the east coast? All these turbines will need to be towed out, assembled, serviced, repaired, etc… Someone’s gotta drive the boats to do all that…