Drilling advances

	Vol. 226 No. 1
LES SKINNER, PE CONTRIBUTING EDITOR

A new environmental group. Recently, operators having leases on public lands in the western US have been victims of extortion in the form of delays for drilling permits. Over the years, environmental groups have been successful in elevating themselves to the status of stakeholders. Under existing regulations, they are entitled to file various legal instruments during the permitting process. While they have been unsuccessful in stopping exploration and drilling activities on public lands, they have been highly successful in delaying the permitting process, costing the operator time and valuable economic resources that could have been used to drill more wells.

The results have been that obtaining a permit to drill on Bureau of Land Management acreage now exceeds six months in many cases. These land parcels were leased by the operators through the nomination process, with bonuses for the leases paid into the general fund of the US. The government recognizes that the leases were legally obtained, the bonuses were properly paid, and the operator has the right to drill for oil and gas under the lease terms. However, they are required to allow all stakeholders, including environmental groups, to have their say before a permit is issued.

This permit process requires a notice of a pending permit to be published at the operator’s expense in local media. The environmentalists have risen to the task of objecting to the permit, often on the flimsiest of reasons, resulting in endless hearings, requests for data, revised environmental impact statements and other “legal” processes that frustrate operators and regulators, while delaying issuance of the required permit to drill.

Residents on private lands nearby, local municipalities that stand to benefit economically from the drilling activity, and administrators of the lands in question all recognize that wells can be drilled safely and in compliance with all environmental rules. Often, only the environmentalists object, raising the hobgoblin of uncontrolled flows and spills.

When permits are finally granted, drilling begins and the environmental groups disappear. Wells are drilled with minimal environmental impact, locations are cleaned scrupulously and oil and gas are produced with little or no spillage. The environmental groups are apparently more interested in stopping the permits than in the actual drilling impact. This would seem to acknowledge the absence of an environmental case against the oil industry. Still, most drilling permits are opposed as though well drilling constitutes a monumental threat to the environment and to world peace.

One wonders whether the environmental groups that are expending so much energy, time and money to delay drilling are also delaying other projects that impact public resources of various kinds, such as timber, decorative rock, wildflowers and fish stocks. It raises the question about who, precisely, are the stakeholders in these other resource areas.

Marine resources, other than oil and gas, may be an area of interest to those of us in the drilling industry. According to Kofi Annan, Secretary General of the United Nations, we are depleting our living natural resources at an alarming rate. Reductions in fish populations and the possibility of extinction of commercial fish species loom on the near horizon. These can have considerable impact on human communities and their economic welfare. Certainly, the demise of the cod fishing industry in the Grand Banks off the East Coast of Canada due to overfishing is a good example.

We all know that the East Coast of the US is closed to exploration and drilling largely due to the effective lobbying of local, state and federal representatives.

But what about fish stocks? Who is protecting the fish? I suggest the drilling industry form an environmental group to perform this vital function. Clearly, when fishing permits are sought to harvest fish in either state or federal waters, there should be an Environmental Impact Statement submitted, based on a thorough study by recognized experts. The permit application should be published in the local news media for public awareness and to allow comment. If there is a risk of over-harvesting any fish species, severe environmental and economic damage could result. We – the protectors of the East Coast fish stocks – should have stakeholder status and be allowed to oppose the issuance of these permits if they are not properly submitted.

This new system would allow the public (other than those living along the East Coast, of course) to have a say in what should and should not be done with national resources, in this case, fish. Persons in other countries could do the same with their fishing industry to prevent extinction of critical species and pollution of the ocean’s waters by poorly maintained fishing vessels. We could not stop every fishing permit by using these tactics, but we could certainly delay them until the applicants file all the proper studies and hold hearings to adequately inform the public.

It will require a lot of resources to get this movement started. We will need a source of funding. A nationwide mass mailing would be a good way to start. We could offer T-shirts with the words “Protecting the World’s Fish,” along with a photograph of some heartless worker gutting a freshly caught fish. We will need some type of legislative machinery in the halls of government and in the UN to lobby for continued delays in granting permits for this hideous, cruel, fish-gutting practice.

On the other hand, perhaps we could encourage the environmental groups to recognize that we are all citizens of the same planet and whatever anyone does affects all others. Truly, no man is an island. As someone wrote years ago, the world survives on commerce based on the availability of abundant supplies of cheap energy, most of which is supplied by oil and gas. Until some other energy source is perfected, we are obliged to drill where hydrocarbons collect.

Delaying the permit process – whether for oil and gas drilling or catching fish – is like trying to capture a tiny drop of mercury under the thumb. The capital and talent required to harvest either are simply squirted out of one area and into another where the harvest can occur more easily. Neither the driller nor the fisherman loses. It’s the public that suffers from the absence of the resource in either situation. 

Les Skinner, VP and Division Manager for Energy Personnel International, Houston, a chemical engineering graduate from Texas Tech University, has 32 years’ experience in drilling and well control with major/ independent operators and well-control companies. Mr. Skinner’s comments will be a regular feature in this column.