I always found it ironic that a lot of the smaller (unmanned) oil platforms in the gulf use small wind turbines and solar panels for power.
Good luck to east coast drilling especially in New England. The crazy environmentalists won’t let it happen. They fight wind turbines on land and at sea, for example. Good luck, as much as it would be good for mariners and the country it won’t happen in the current climate of society.
[QUOTE=tugsailor;136528]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.[/QUOTE]
It was several years of exploration in the North Sea before anything promising was found. Seismograph technology has grown by leaps and bounds. In '76 I was on a seismograph vessel with the first long gun array. We shot the Gulf Coast of Florida and the entire East Coast up to Georges Bank. Records were in such better detail that we were sent to the North Sea to re-shoot many fields and velocity surveys. Back then we were recording on magnetic tape and stacking data (compression) had just came into being. We would come into port every 2 weeks to unload and reload a tractor trailer load of tapes. The tapes in the North Sea were unloaded by helicopter. Nowadays, you can record all of that data on a memory stick.
In the area I live, the old oil and gas fields were supposed to be depleted. With the 3D seismic and fracking, they realized that the reserves have just barely been touched.
Bucksport sounds most excellent to me!
There is no shortage of ports and underutilized docks in the Northeast. Davisville, Fall River, New Bedford, Boston, Gloucester ,Portsmouth, Portland, Brunswick, Bath, Rockland, Searsport, (I don’t see Bucksport, Winterport, Bangor, Ellsworth, or anyplace else between there and Eastport.
Eastport is deep water and probably closer. It would certainly roll out the red carpet, and attract funding from the state, feds, and Passamaquoddy Tribe. Land and labor would be cheap. Route 9 is pretty good these days and there is now a very good road from Calais to the underutilized deep water port at Saint John.
Again, I think Davisville is the most likely starting port. Boston would make sense if it weren’t for the longshoremen’s union.
Yeah but that energy can’t be loaded on a tanker and sold to China, now can it?
Time and distance. Laydown area. Not just a dock. But one that can moor a Rig as well as one that can moor a flotilla of Vessels. With a rig you’re talking about 50’ at MLW, with minnium Under keel clearances (or should i say under thruster clearances. Eastport has a huge tidal influx is miles from the nearest interstate. Does have some rail but again it’s days past Portland. You could barge it up but then there’s that pesky tide again. I’m sure that there will be something staged out of Eastport but the whole shootin match? No sorry, don’t see it. Think Large Dock with deepwater access. 40 acres or so of laydown area. How close to rail? How sheltered? Cranes? Moorage area? ( think a Mile circle. 1600m anchor pattern) Fishermen are going to hate that. and ready access to Fuel tankage. I see 2 possibles and LNG looked at both and the NIMBYs had their own issues. Searsport/Sears Island, I’m sure there’s places in Portland, and Rockland as well. There’s even Harpswell’s DSFB and town Dog walk that might of been LNG REGAS. laydown area and deepwater dock. No rail and Not sure they want the road traffic it would bring. Mass? No, NH? , No, ME Yes, East of Portland, West of MDI.
[QUOTE=catherder;136556]Yeah but that energy can’t be loaded on a tanker and sold to China, now can it?[/QUOTE]
If I may, Its not Energy. For every bbl of Oil how much goes to “energy”? Petrochemicals is the bulk of what you get out of oil. I know, I know, WHAT! those blasted CHEMICALS?! Look it up on your own. Why does China buy Oil? Because of Chemicals Because of Plastics, and Pharmaceuticals that come from Crude oil. Lube oil, Petro chemicals Everyone thinks that oil is all Energy… And yes Paddy, Hey we’ve got a Floating wind turbine. YAY! Get the power from the wind turbine to shore to a transmission line. Then Gene spice in a Rabbit gene. And get the NIMBYs and fishermen to say … Ok you can put 300 of them up within sight of land. (because you have to connect them to the “GRID”) Then you 've got sustainable energy… Why is sustainable energy good? to drive your power bill down? no, it’s good because cheaper electricity means it’s cheaper to build and manufacture things. Not a lot of that goes on in Maine As our taxes are a bit too high these days. Sorry bit of a rant. But having lived i Maine for 44 years while traveling the world I’ve become a bit jaded.
Oh my, Cheng,
Lay off the midwatch coffee, ok? 
(I worked for a chemical company for five years. I know where plastic comes from).
Moor a rig ?
Portland or Halifax…
===========
Would be nice to get some wind farms going. It is a big thing off of UK, Germany, Denmark and Holland. Lots of platform building and installation work, some serious offshore construction vessels working during install season (spring/summer/early fall). I’ve got some great photos from last season, but alas am too stoopid to be able to post them here.
For wind farms, the combination of a big platform construction / lay down area, close to relatively shallow water, a reasonable service port once all is installed, and out of sight of land seems to work best. Cape Wind seems to have this figured out, but alas chose a site that is in sight.
In Europe, this gives almost everywhere from Antwerp to Sylt in the North Sea and from Flensberg east in the Baltic.
That floating windmill seen in this thread is a toy.
The latest Enercon units are in the region of 2000-6000 kW all day long … http://www.enercon.de/de-de/ but they are huge and need a serious bottom fixed platform.
Germany would install more wind projects faster in the North Sea, but are having some serious issues with enough HV transmission lines from the coast to the users. That is gumming up the pace of work.
Oh yeah - there is an actual guvmin’t policy that encourages wind power too. Once you see the massive scale of the work and number of companies and their facilities, it is pretty hard to argue against it.
Just for fun, I pulled out a chart. From the Northeastern most point of US waters on The Hague Line adjacent to Canadian drilling blocks at about 41 N / 066 W to various possible support ports APPROXIMATE distances are
Davisville 275
Halifax 275
Yarmouth 199
Gloucester 255
Boston 265
Portland 275
Searsport. 275
Eastport 275
[QUOTE=tugsailor;136585]Just for fun, I pulled out a chart. From the Northeastern most point of US waters on The Hague Line adjacent to Canadian drilling blocks at about 41 N / 066 W to various possible support ports APPROXIMATE distances are
Davisville 275
Halifax 275
Yarmouth 199
Gloucester 255
Boston 265
Portland 275
Searsport. 275
Eastport 275[/QUOTE]
Cool. Thanks.
I know the original post was about Georges Bank but do you folks not believe they will start off the coast of N.C./S.C./GA 1st? I know it’s just one opinion but I see this Country going LNG in the future for the most part. To me it’s just a matter of which state is gonna allow the 1st LNG plant?
Bay runner - You understood exactly what I was saying. I think the learning curve will be a little more then 2 years though, more like 3 or 4.
If there was a boom I think most of those ports would be capable of expanding to handle it. It’d be great for the New England economy too. The only tricky part is all the Right Whale Protection areas. Environmental groups, I imagine would block it hard. And while there’s a good libertarian base in some parts I can’t image most North East politicians supporting it.
[QUOTE=AB Murph;136596]I know the original post was about Georges Bank but do you folks not believe they will start off the coast of N.C./S.C./GA 1st? I know it’s just one opinion but I see this Country going LNG in the future for the most part. To me it’s just a matter of which state is gonna allow the 1st LNG plant?
Bay runner - You understood exactly what I was saying. I think the learning curve will be a little more then 2 years though, more like 3 or 4.[/QUOTE]
The most important thing is to drill where the oil is most likely to be.
So it depends upon what the geophysical works shows, and I presume what the Canadians find, if anything, in similar geological structures.
If Canada is drilling on Georges Bank and finding oil, the Northeast bears the risk of a spill. if the Canadians are already drilling, what difference does it make if we also drill in the same area. I think there may be some political bias toward allowing drilling near where it was previously allowed in the 80s. If Canada does not find oil near the US border, it is less likely that drilling would be allowed on the US side of the border. That might favor drilling first in the Southeast. Right now East Coast drilling is strictly a Canadian show.
[QUOTE=LI_Domer;136600]If there was a boom I think most of those ports would be capable of expanding to handle it. It’d be great for the New England economy too. The only tricky part is all the Right Whale Protection areas. Environmental groups, I imagine would block it hard. And while there’s a good libertarian base in some parts I can’t image most North East politicians supporting it.[/QUOTE]
Its double edge sword, Ive lived I Maine my whole life , They barley want commercialal fishing to happen off our coast, Maine is be hide the times as far an having an infrastructure to even start tending to oil units on our coast. But with enough time and money you can do anything.I dont know a whole lot about offshore drilling or the impact on nearby coastal areas (normal operations) but New England could use the boost
What distance is generally thought to be a practical run to an offshore oil exploration well from a support base?
Before it starts making sense to develop a closer port?
Runs to far platforms from Fourchon can be 250+nm. Even when Galveston may be closer in some cases.
[QUOTE=CETOOT70;136603]Its double edge sword, Ive lived I Maine my whole life , They barley want commercialal fishing to happen off our coast, Maine is be hide the times as far an having an infrastructure to even start tending to oil units on our coast. But with enough time and money you can do anything.I dont know a whole lot about offshore drilling or the impact on nearby coastal areas (normal operations) but New England could use the boost[/QUOTE]
They won’t even let them dredge Searsport! A strategically important port for the region where it’s not even possible to dock your average-sized fully-loaded ship! The funniest part about that whole NJ salt crisis thing is that even if they could have gotten a ship to go up there and get the salt, they wouldn’t have been able to take more than a little bit of it before the ship was aground at the dock!
The environmentalists in Maine are really bad, but you want to know who the real criminals are? LOBSTERMEN. I swear, lobstermen are worse than the damn longshore unions. Everyone always says, “Oh you can’t say that, they’re just a bunch of hard working guys trying to put food on the table for their families.” NO. SCREW THEM. They think they own the f******g ocean and don’t want anyone to use it except them. That’s why places on the coast of Maine like Searsport that have HUGE economic potential can’t do anything but run around in circles with their heads up their asses…
There is no future for the maritime industry on the coast of Maine, not for oil, not for short-sea-shipping, not for anything. The lobstermen and the environmentalists combined will make DAMN sure of that. I would like to see drilling start off of New England if only to see all the mighty resources of big oil come to bear and eternally crush the souls of lobstermen and environmentalists from New York to Eastport. Let 'em all burn!!!
Long runs is good. It would mean more boats needed plus we would stay on station longer if we only have 3 boats working the rig. We run 210NM to our drill ship with up to 5 support vessels. all 280’ or bigger plus 2 crew boats.