Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Paparazzi Ethnography’ Category

Gracious hosts and ad hoc dialogues of exchange individually experienced while living together during the course of a week — Neryungri, Yakutia (Russia). mealmeal3meal 2

Occupy Siberia

I re-visited the local museum in Neryungri for one last glimpse of this Yakutian town — as presented through its own local history.

On display were images of Neryungri taken during the 1970s and 1980s — reflecting a type of early vision which beckons toward its current form. The three images below include a building titled Museum [Музей]; an installation (exhibit); and photographic collage. Collectively, these images define a process of my personal encounter with Neryungrian historical form. Museumexhibitpictoral
The image above is an arrival scene of the first constructed residential building in Neryungri. Below, I have blown-up one image for closer inspection:
New beginningsNotice in this image the celebration of things marking various relations of intimacy as a lived experience: a mattress moving through the front door, a leather brief case that lies on top of other items, and the metallic/plastic suit case (to the right of the leather brief) that sits on the earth, thrown there off the truck, making an indent in the snow.

What is on is display is a typology of the personal. Such things as a briefcase that require closeness to the body [carried under the arm and opened by hand], are situated among other things in a hierarchy based on their ability to register human touch. Together, it is a visual on new beginnings as displayed by the will of things to assert themselves as personal belongings.

One exhibit hall was littered with oil paintings of development:Oil paintings Among these paintings, one artist’s rendition below of the “elevated cabin” stands out as a prototype of the Neryungrian departure from its proto-developmental form, reaching, that is, toward an articulation of a high-energy civilization. Behold:Painting
The geographer Vaclav Smil, writing on high-energy consumption, captures an essence of the painting in this reminder of modern energy’s capacity: “In 1900 even a well-off Great Plains farmer holding the reins of six large horses while plowing his wheat field — controlled with considerable physical exertion while perched on a steel seat and often enveloped in dust — sustained delivery of no more than 5 KW of animate power. A century later his counterpart driving a large tractor effortlessly controls more than 250 KW while sitting in the air-conditioned and stereo-enlivened comfort of his elevated cabin” (2000:23-25).

Thus, on display through the “elevated cabin” is comfort and convenience in the harness of industrial production. It is also an instance of the urban form, a rebellion emerging across the Siberian space, as if importing a type of cosmopolitan resource into the super-natural landscape as part of a project to occupy Siberia.showier In the collage directly above, I have attempted to capture the import of cosmopolitan resource through the tableau of men-at-work — gazing out before them (toward an object of labor). In the case of the Neryungrian, his object of labor are other paintings inside of the museum exhibit itself, and as such, artistic labor becomes a manner of intense reflection.

Read Full Post »

Neryungri


University of the Arctic:


Extractive Industries Workshop !!!

startingplaneshoesflightshack1roadPie

U Arctic extractive industries workshop:

The Arctic as extractive industries resource frontier: legal and political economy developments, November 9-14, 2014

Neryungri Technical Institute, [southern] Yakutia, Russia.



DAY FIVE (!!!):
Irina Zhilina is now up talking about her upcoming PhD program at College of Fisheries working under Peter Arbo on Barents Sea oil and gas development, looking at integrated developments. For example, the Norwegian/Russian boundary treaty is taken in western Europe as a success, while in Russia, generally, there were several serious disagreements which upended the process of its full ratification.

Primary drivers of Arctic oil/gas exploration: scope and pace of climate change, economic conditions and global markets, advances in offshore technology and maritime transport, policy developments. As such, international cooperation through “integrated” development could potentially respond to these various sectorial developments, and the process of this development, frameworks, centralization, distributed authorities, all make a difference in characterizing the fragmentation/integration of Barents developments. Irina is pointing out that most of her research will be focused on oil companies and suppliers, collaborative projects (the Norwegian Russian ship reporting systems, Barents rescue, Joint Norwegian Russian environmental commission); but also on frameworks and Arctic strategies.

vitaly2 Up now we have Vitaly Kornilov (above) talking about labor markets in Northern Russia, Republic of Sakha (Yakutia), from the perspective of “decent work” concepts within international labor organization (social partnerships, protections, fundamental principles associated with rights of employment, issues of child labor). The Russian North has several specific issues that distinguish labor conditions from other parts of the country as well as the international context.

Screen Shot 2014-11-14 at 3.11.24 PMHenri Wallen is now talking about cumulative social impacts of predevelopment mining projects, looking at the Finnish mine project in Sokli.

map1It turns out that the mine is in various stages of development, and Henri is examining its futures. There is a speculative (discursive) mining boom in Finland, in part, because of a change of law in 2011 opening up vast tracts of land for exploration by mining firms, thereby, liberalizing the playing field for prospects of development.

Sokli has both uranium and phosphorous deposits, yet obtaining the phosphorous license appears possible with far less regulatory hurdles that uranium, opening the possibility for developing the latter in a step-wise process.

map2According to pro-development groups (municipality, Regional Council of Lapland, Labor unions), the cost benefit analysis for the project favors employment, whereas the those against development (nature activists, reindeer herders, tourism industry) have raised contamination issues to the region and possibly outside the area through the affect on rivers.

One of the contributions here consists of looking at the context of “social impacts” itself, finding out the principles in which social “Impacts” accumulate over time. In the end, for example, assessments by social authorities may or may not assess the actual event-impacts.map3

We had a rather lively discussion over the object itself, wanting to know more about the genealogy of the “cumulative impact assessment”.

So finally, for the last speaker of the workshop, we have Nikolai Vakhtin, skyped in from St. Petersburg European University, speaking on extractive industries (EI) and local population, beginning with “deconstruction” of terms indigenous, newcomers [sic], moving to soviet-time industrial geography and heritage, and the future of EI in the Arctic. Dr. Vakhtin explains that it takes perhaps 50 years for any one “group” to “feel” as an indigenous peoples, which he interchanges with the word “local” population [sic]. But in fact, indigenous is a “legal” term, strictly speaking [the opinions expressed here are of Dr. Vakhtin’s, ed.].

Dr. Vakhtin cites Andrei Parshev, Why Russia Isn’t America? (1999) — suggesting that Russia’s geography is entirely located in a cold space, and thus, should shield itself from the global market, given the competitive costs of development. Fiona Hill and Clifford Gaddy, authors of The Siberian Curse (2003), likewise examine the consequences of operating under the past seven decades of Soviet governance in the modern global system of competition, leaving the country with a continued non-market system, in part, attempting to master and develop the Northern region (planners, creating pools of labor lured to the North to distribute populations across the state).

statueAs such, Russia’s 1/3 of the population live and work in almost impossibly cold climate regions in Siberia, responsible on central elements of distribution, four times as high expenses as more temperate areas, and living without adequate transportation networks, road infrastructure, badly built housing, district heating systems always on the verge of failure. In fact, Temperature Per Capita (TPC) distribution: USA (1930) +1.1 c; Sweden -3.9; Canada -9.9; Russia (1926) -11.6. But in fact, by 1989, Canada’s TPC was about -8, versus Russia which has gone higher than -9.9 to about -12. In fact, Russia pays a “cold tax” in the neighborhood of 2.25-3.0 percent a year, because its “misallocation” of populations in the north.

Russia’s population density in the North is 40-50 times greater than in Canada (Russia has 9 of the 10 largest cities in the far North). Since 1989, Chukotka lost over 60% of its population, Magadan region lost 40%, Kamchatka lost 18%, Sakha lost 10%.


costume1costume4costume3costumeplay1play2play3
DAY FOUR (!):
Up now, we have Mikhail Prissyaznyy talking about differences between metropolitan capitals and northern regions emphasizing government and company supports of extractive industry cities.

Jonathan Parsons is now up talking about resistance to extractive industries in Newfoundland and Labrador, referring to the Petroculture of the St. Johns, on Canada’s eastern seaboard. Jonathan is exploring the context of resistance in the region, identifying various public and media displays by which residents frame their own ambivalence to the risks and rewards to mining and shale gas development.
partyMuseum

Now a general planning discussion about the thematic network and phd program (which is an activity of the thematic network) and the funding, which is from Norway to create North American-Norwegian cooperation. Gunhild Hoogensen-Gjørv is the Principal Investigator, now going over the previous trips in Canada (St. Johns), Norway (Tromsø), Russia (Neryungri).




photoinggroupteaminsidinginsiding2
DAY THREE: Jon Skinner speaking about his PhD research underway at U Alaska Fairbanks, working on Kara Sea, looking at political science perspectives on oil and gas development with attention to international oil company development decision making, political leadership in Russia, Arctic governmental and international environmental policy.

Oh, and of course, we had my humble contribution, conversing over ninety-minutes on the such topics as the paparazzi ethnographic form.

BusUp now we have, Asya Lazareva, talking about the richest resource republic in Russia, the Sakha Republic. Economic profits and the role of the northern resources in global development, prospectus of mining, and economic activity in the North.

The scale of economic activity in the North places Russia in the top spot. Northern regions produce about 11% of GDP with 5% of population. Yakutia has about 1 million people, but rands first in the Russian Federation by total reserves of natural resources development, an economy built primarily on exportation (diamond, gold, tin, coal, oil and gas production, electric power production).

Capital investments are increasing, including construction of pipelines for natural gas export (China). Oil: Surgutnefetgaz, YaTek, Gazprom, Tuymaada-Neft, Sakhaneftegazsbut; and Gas: Gazprom (external market), YaTEK (internal market).

huddleProspects are increasing every day for resource production. Arctic environment is rapidly changing as well. So the ecological aspects are extremely important, especially regarding permafrost in Yakutia, which poses traditional difficulties for resource extraction.

At any rate, some of the most important processes (for development and human living) is interaction between agitation and permafrost, carbon emissions, and global temperature change.

The Arctic part of Yakutia/Sakha is less well developed, with communities living under conditions not as modernized as the southern part of the republic. Pollution of the environment, deforestation, nearly 200 million tons of waste, 92 million tons of untreated sewage, 1982 tons of harmful emissions produced each year.AsyaAsya2Most significant area of disturbed lands are concentrated in the areas of mining development: Mirny, Neryungri and Aldan districts.

Big industrial machinery, blowout of pipelines, accidents, catastrophic events that can last for decades. “Megaprojects” such as Eastern Siberia – Pacific Ocean and “The Power of Siberia”. The vastness of the region itself is mirrored within the future visions itself.

handsHow are [industrial] plants decommissioned? Well, that is a good question, to which Asya points out that industry has expressed quite a bit of ambivalence on this topic, not necessarily seeing any economic motivation whatsoever in reclamation processes, and dumping the responsibility on the state and civilian structures.
Of course, now we are having a general discussion about analytical and methodological considerations, for example, when constructing the PhD dissertation, how does Asya plan to frame so many macro-to-micro concerns, to which she points out, that her concerns primarily focus on development futures, how particular discourses impinge on aspects of Arctic development.

Lunch



Yuka Oishi, PhD Candidate from Tokyo Metropolitan University, Cultural Anthropology, is now up, talking about environmental use in the Khanty, specifically, the Num-to lake area in the Yamal-Nenets region. Yuko provides an instructive background on developments in the area, the first gas/oil fields established in the mid 1950s, with industrialization of oil in the mid 1960s, and by the 1980s, with pasture destruction, the forced migration of Khanty. So, as Yuko points out, land in the area has been redefined over the years, mainly into three categories of the modern condition, before soviet collectivization, the soviet period, and post oil development period.

Here we go. Yuko provides a chapter-by-chapter discussion of her dissertation on cultural articulations in post socialist indigenous people’s communities, backgrounds, changes of livelihood and environmental use (in political-economic transformation), nomadism, and other such interesting objects of inquiry.
nerner2photo
image2image1autoautorealinsidetown
DAY TWO: Beginning with Gunhild Hoogensen Gjørv, talking about tensions between environmental, economic and energy security, providing a working definition about the concept of security, emphasizing the relationship between individuals, livelihoods and governance, that is, creating a space of provisioning, remarking also on the historical context of security in the Arctic, which was primarily a military concern among states.

In the Arctic, climate change debate is a threat to economic and energy security, and increasingly part of policy debate — while at the same time, many discussions about resource development are not taking place within the same time-space experiences as sustainability and climate concerns. Gunhild points out the example of Arctic Circle event last week in Reykjavik, in which separate sessions dealt individually with issues that likely should be talked about openly within the same space, for full debate on the enormity of the stakes involved in the climate change – energy consumption nexus.
group
Q & A: Debates about Norwegian oil development within the Norwegian public discourse. Well, in fact, there is quite a bit of discussion about oil development, for example, a moratorium on oil extraction in the Lofoten region, and here, the discussion is not about climate change (as a global issue) but instead local fishing industry and local identity (as a national concern).

Newly accepted PhD student to College of Fisheries, U Tromsø, Irina Zhilina,  and Florian Stammler, Professor at U Lapland, Arctic Centre, brought up several comparative questions regarding how the federal state identifies oil wealth through exports to security and sustainability, prompting Gunhild to point out that renewable and non-renewable resources, while rising in the public debate, are not critical to the provisioning of the modern state.

Up now, we have Dr. Travor Brown, professor at Memorial University in New Foundland, Canada, talking about “strategic HR [human resource] planning” — and the merit of “building versus buying model” – whether it makes sense to bring in trained labor or train the local talent to the skill of the current requirements of industrial development.

GunhildPros and cons to both. The cost of buying skill is expensive, paying dearly for certain skills (although, the training time is truncated). Bringing in *stars* that do not necessarily perform as well when taken out of the environment that created them as A-listers.

Community reaction is also a consideration, because labor contracts oppose outside expertise.

Training locally, for example, creates flexibility and consistency, though there is a ceiling in the case of, say, situations where there is a short term need for a certain skill set, bringing in workers with multiple years of expertise (or even semi-retired and senior persons) can create efficiencies unavailable at the local level.everyoneLunch “What’s required for the job?”, an important question when regarding a hire-training program. In mining towns of the North, the “personal level” — a strategic phrase to describe the evaluatory assessment of personal worth in the context of productivity to the company. By the way, that is Travor in the photo above, sitting to the right, just about to start a yummy lunch at the local cafe, a karaoke bar on the theme of Soviet society. We greatly appreciated their cabbage salad, which was devilishly spicy.

Techniques of training (lecturing, visual aids, critical incidents and cases, role play, simulations) as Off-the-Job instructional format. Technology. Behavioral Modelling — preview the principle, observe a trainer perform the task, trainees perform a task, trainees receive feedback.


Photo3Photo1Photo2
Governing the body…. through technology.




Cognitive modeling — “Do things quietly in your head” — of course more than that, but the affect of discourse can never be underestimated. That is, creating a habitus toward productivity and safety. Simulation and identical elements. Doing things that work, requires replication off-site, to bring back on-site guiding principles, habitually established in the body (and, of course, in your head). The role of task confidence in transfer, an issue that links the concept of training to a concept of effectiveness.

Conclusion: what is the status of a “trained work force” in the North, for making development happen? Developing your own skills is a better return on investment, but for short term productivity, bringing in the experts is the more efficient purposeful approach to efficient return.
schack2

Talk of the Town

souphandsshoescoal statueoldphotocoal
DAY ONE: Opening of the course with comments from Serguei Pavlov, Director, NEFU Technical Institute; Mikhail Prissyanznyy, NEFU Vice-Rector, U Arctic Board of Governance Member; and Florian Stammler, Head of Thematic network, Professor Arctic Centre, talking about the importance of networking and exchanges across the Arctic and the role of СВФУ (NEFU) in the extractive industries network from the very beginning, also with some discussion last year at the Arctic Circle among guests in Reykjavik. Michael up speaking first, thanking Florian for his hard work in establishing and sustaining the extractive industry network and even providing Florian with a plaque from the region, celebrating the U Arctic activity in Neryungri for the first time as a host. Michael also provides a plaque to Serguei Pavlov, for his important role in hosting this event [applause all around].
everyone
Florian providing greetings and thanks to the thematic network, especially taking place in a mining town where extractive industries is taking place.

First talk by Florian Stammler and Aitalina Ivanova – Confrontation, coexistence or co-ignorance – Indigenous resource rights and implementation negotiation in two Russian extractive industries regions. Utilitarian logic and negotiation logic. Resource: something extracted for the use of people (renewable and non renewable) – extractive industries: large scale processes related to resource (subsurface, hydrocarbon, mining, fishing, forestry). Determining a logic in which humans own and control the land, conquer, master, make useful versus a partnerships logic, in which people are a part of the land, in which people are part of the land itself and do not envision resource as added-value. These two logics are regulated by law, best practices guidelines, and different kinds of commitments.

Aitalina is up now talking about Case 1, confrontation – the Itelmen fishermen of Petropavlosvsk and West Kamachatcka living on the shore of highly productive fishing grounds. The main conflict is about restricting indigenous resource use rights. The state wants to diminish the niche of fisherman traditional livelihood following a partnership logic in relation with their resource. The state regulates following an utilitarian logic where all land rights and fishing rights belong to development to maximize industry profits.

whereminingmidningThat is, the State has in interest in eliminating indigenous livelihood and resource — because it the latter represents a non-commercial use of a commercially valuable resource. in Contrast, the State wants to create best possible conditions for big industry to extract most profit of the resource (fish). According to one indigenous elder, “[we have] fifteen minutes are left to practice traditional life” [because of restriction of quota and fishing time or direct harassment of state structures]. Industry eliminates competitors by transferring the job of pushing indigenous partnership approach out to the state.

fire3fire1fire2Case-study #2 -coexistence: consideration of mutual interests among various resource users. The fishermen of the Lena Delta live on the shore of the Laptev Sea. The State assigns a niche for them in a protected area and allows indigenous people to live in partnership with resources on their own terms, by granting them access to riverbanks and fishing grounds and quotas for one special indigenous enterprise — in doing so, the state accepts that indigenous have their own rules, but on the other hand, indigenous accepts their niche under the state rule. Another example of process of co-existence — Kolkohz artel “Arktika” (Sakha Republic) founded in the 1920s, produced the only Arctic enterprise that did not change its name or legal form with the members as shareholders.
imagechords
Case three: co-ignorance, where the state and companies avoid detailed regulations of resource use practices. Co-ignorance works as long as the stakes are low and industry production is small. The state reserves the right to express the superiority of its utilitarian logic for the future, in case more subsurface resource extraction rights should be given to industrial companies. The Evenky herders of Kamchatka live with their reindeer between a mining area and a national park in a situation the presenters call co-ignorance of delating with other land users.
landscapeCo-ignorance appears stable as long as industrial stakes are low.

Q&A: How does the quote system operate? A: allocated by regional authorities, typically by scientific justification, but typically, the issue is a local/regional issue (versus federal) with indigenous folks.
Florian There is a lot of interesting discussion about the role of the state in Russia, e.g., in the past, in the field, that there is a Soviet nostalgia, that in Soviet times, Indigenous persons received a lot of support, embraced by the State patron which granted them possibilities to subsist, and that has indeed changed a lot.

Lunch

After Lunch

Yulia Zaika is up now, talking about her extensive background in International Polar Year and Polar Early Career activities and her latest research on quality of life indicators in Russian Arctic cities as well as her dissertation overview, focusing on urbanization in northern Russia and specifically, the Murmansk region as an industrialized city and its transformation into a sustainable form.
Dinnerscreen2Alexandershack3patches3night

Read Full Post »

Dinner at Zhivago’s

Moscow1Moscow 2inside

Read Full Post »

Reykjavik

signWinePeaceOutsideHall

Opening night



Indigenous Plenary
Alexey Tsykarev, Member of United Nations expert mechanism on rights of Indigenous Peoples, Office of United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights stating that he is happy that this year there is [at least] more discussion on Indigenous issues that last year.

Read Full Post »

Toronto

TSWFrontroomroomTSW
This year’s theme, Arctic: Societies, Sustainability, and Safety, focuses on: (1) Arctic Climate Science, (2) Arctic Safety and Cross-Border Knowledge Needs, and (3) Arctic Research-Based Industrial Development and Resource Management.

Frontal

 

Read Full Post »

Kabelvåg

walkactanthuhinsidebandhoyemsvolvaerrectortown

Read Full Post »

London: Barents O&G

[I plan to come back and re-work this blog- give me a few days, ed.]

opening


Oil and Gas Exploration in the Barents Sea, October 6-7, St. Ermin’s Hotel, Caxton Street, London, SW1H 0QW


entrance


October 7: Day Two
Chair’s Opening Remarks

Hans-Christen Rønnevik, Vice President Exploration, Lundin Norway AS
Lundin’s Story: How Do We Unfold Reality In A Mature Area? Lundin’s exploration activities based on 42 years of experience in the Barents sea; The Gohta oil discovery; The petroleum habitat of the Loppa High
water
Begins quite philosophically, about the role of knowledge. “Visions are achieved by action, not by thinking”. Fact and experience based operational knowledging (conceptual procedures). [I will have to return to post up some of Hans’s slides, which are made up of declarations which he states in a clear punctuated manner – mainly, modeling is not a method of thinking, but certainly a necessary skill] — continuously unfold reality as you interact with it – to explain broadband 3D for deterministic mapping as input to models. Gohta discovery in the Loppa high, 2013: recoverable resources 10-23 Sm3 oil/ 8-15 billion sm3 gas; 2014: Gohta 2 Environmental mapping in Barents Norway since 2007, working with NGU and FFI.

Key Note: Denis Francois, Geoscience Director, TOTAL E&P Norge AS and Dominique Roy, Western Europe New Ventures Manager¸ TOTAL E&P Norge AS: Weighing up economic implications of operating in the Barents Sea; Facing technological challenges – experiences from Novarg and Snøhvit; Managing operations in an unfavourable climate condition. Total/Fina/Elf – Yet to Find. West Barents 4.8 boe and East Barents NO 2 boe. Novarg – new venture stage: 2008 to license award 2009. Looking to set up an LNG ii train to Snøhvit.

Artem Rabey, Exploration Manager, LUKOIL Overseas North Shelf: Tectonic development, depositional environment and sedimentation; Analogies with Timan-Pechora basin; Hydrocarbon potential — two licenses in Norway.

Knut Gunnar Amaliksen, Senior Geophysical Advisor, Wintershall Norge: Predicting the good reservoir; The Importance of field work; Be brave and the rewards will come. Pre-Jurassic reservoirs. PL611 – Kvalross Analogue (Edgeøya, Svalbard).

Hot Topics discussion: Hans-Christian presents the problems — How do we form strategic alliances in rig sharing; should there be tax breaks in Barents Sea; Cost issue where 500 million barrels is appropriate development; Will Statoil’s step program build efficiency; Can the French take more Snøhvit gas to France; what about oil spill issues and environmental concerns; and local community impact on development in the region; Have we solved the problem of oil and gas, and can it be done without more exploration and what is the role of tax relief.

Cost issue: Terje Flaten, Statoil, takes the stage to present the issue — what kind of single oil pool accumulations can you have for commercial development given oil price scenarios and current cost regimes – I didn’t quite say 500 million barrels, could be distance to market, technics etc. e.g., Golath is 175 million barrels – Johan C. field, two accumulations, had they been in one single accumulation we would have been happier. Further into the Barents need to find +300 million barrels oil. Industry self inflicted upon itself a cost regime that 3 times larger than previously, and now the cost profile is [through the roof] – attempting to standardize at the High North – lower scale of cost, pushing back on prices for development because of differences in Barents versus North Sea (e.g., depth);

Gas strategy for transportation: ? from the back of the room — delivering gas to Western Europe is a political issue, that could create security in the region.

Environment: Stig-Morten Knutsentalking about lenses and in-situ burning for oil spills. Several issues that need to be working as an industry as an issue. Other speakers focus effort on well-blow out prevention instead of on spill. When you talk about oil spill, its about optics. Also safeguarding — evacuation, getting people in and out — waiting for initiative to expand base on Bear Island or does the industry invest into creating better preparedness.

Rig alliances – [what can be created among oil companies and a rig fleet on continuous activities and a coordinated rationalized plan] – The longest lead item to carry this out is the Rig – “have an adult conversation about our needs and then approach the rig owners”. Looking for a group rig share for the 23rd license. Tax relief — 78% investment return.

Ove Tobias Gudmestad, Professor of Marine Technology, University of Stavanger; Emergency Operations, Evacuation And Rescue In The Barents Sea; The physical environmental conditions in the Barents Sea; Emergency and evacuation operations in the cold arctic seas; The geography of the Barents Sea and rescue operations – Arctic versus cold climate region (Barents region). Referring to Barents 2020 map created by DNV with step wise development into Barents area.

Stein Sandven, Vice Director, Nansen Environmental and Remote Sensing Centre
Breaking the Ice: Managing Operations in Icy Environments; Understanding different structures of ice and how to incorporate this knowledge into operations; Predicting and detecting ice to optimise exploration operations; Identifying technology to ease operations in ice; Learning from past operations in remote, ice ridden regions: case study of other Arctic regions — How do we predict and how do we detect.





Buck
October 6: Day One
Chair’s Opening Remarks
Hans-Christen Rønnevik, Vice President Exploration, Lundin Norway AS

8:58AM – Just getting started here – a hush has taken over the group of about 50 industry players and now it looks like Anna Townsend, Program Manager, is going to get us started with a quick announcement, including a welcome to Dolphin Physical, a company sponsor, and a few Russian presentations were cancelled because of visa issues, and a few other persons who may or may not be coming, and now Hans-Christen.

“Welcome to a Norwegian conference, the same hotel where Philby delivered his secrets to Russian agents, and here we are years later and with the same situation with Russians not able to obtain visas”.

Tax relief giving a new life to the Norwegian Continental Shelf (NCS). More diversity and many more companies now involved in NCS development. Amended tax regime as on the UK shelf in the 1980s led to more players. Barents opening began in the 1960s with hypothesis looking for inverted Volgian highs.

Latest – Active concession policy and new players from 2002: Johan Castberg, Wisting and Gotha results of 3D seismic and the geologists belief in the possibilities. 33 companies are cooperating on 4 broadband 3D seismic surveys for 23rd round. The truth is not determined by majority voting. Renewed interred due to oil success and large structures available.


Opening Address: The Barents Sea, A New Era
Wenche Tjelta Johansen, Head of G&G, Norwegian Petroleum Directorate
Exploration history of the Barents Sea
Undiscovered resources yet to find
Requirements for the Norwegian Continental Shelf and Barents Sea
Updates on the 23rd licensing round

78 fields in production, 60 in North Sea, 17 NCS, 1 in Barents; 13 fields being developed. Prolonging production requires enhanced recovery, opening new areas. 480 wells drilled on NCS (12 drilled 2005, lowest ever, has increased because of high prices, last year second highest exploration wells ever).

Key inputs to assessment: number of possible prospects, size distribution, probability of success, hydrocarbon phase. Statistical methods: calculated stochastically (Monte Carlo simulation), results for individual plays are aggregated to give a total quantity, presented as a probability distribution.

Creaming curve Barents Sea, based on 90 wildcat wells, last three years considerable resource growth. Optimism is back in the Barents sea and explorations wells highest in the last two years.

Barents Sea South East: NPD data aquired spring and summer for most prospective areas.Barents Sea North 2012-2014. Licensing rounds held every second year. 23rd Licensing round – January – 160 blocs nominated, 140 in the Barents Sea. 61 proposed blocks on public hearing.

Goliath production this year. Only one producing in Barents, Snovit, gas bearing. Unit costs can be reduced through cross licenses.

Q & A: How do you include in your yet to find, recent good news and bad news.
Yet to find, is updated every 2 years.
What percentage of wells drilled in the Barents are based on hydrocarbon indicators?


Where Do Real Opportunities Lie? Investment Conditions In The Northern And Southern Barents Sea
Haakon Haaland, Executive Vice President Business Development & Exploration, E.ON E&P
Distinguishing the key players and possible future players in the Barents Sea
Understanding the status of developments in the Southern and Northern Barents Sea
Evaluating the most recent Barents Sea discoveries
Venturing into the former grey zone

Political/Commercial aspects of industry. Mix between state/private is key to what will happen in the Barents going forward. Before continuing a few facts about E.ON E&P. Current focus areas, UK, Norway, Russia, Algeria and Brazil. 14 production fields, 5 producing fields as operator, 60 exploration licenses, staff of 220 employees and 200 contractors.

Crossing the 62 median line (not so much the “Barents Area”) — was the industry ready. No secret that the Barents was Gas, not a big prospect, always looking for oil. A decisive energetic ministry combined with competent NPD – creating the right policy of exploration. Barents initiative during the 1990s, wanting something to happen, and taking decisive action to encourage exploration. In terms of a global scene, it is a well organized efficient development process (data organized and released timely, modestly costed). Goliat, Goliate-Kobbe, Johan Castberg – drilling boom.

Barent Players – Statoil still major player in Barents Sea exploration; Majors not active anymore: Exxon, Shell – Companies left the area: Mobil, Saga, Hydro; New important entrants: ENOI, Lundin, OMV Other newcomers: DF, DONG, Noreco, Repsol.

ENI, Statoil, Lundin, continues to have stamina. Barents: After more than 30 years still a frontier area. Not the North Sea, Key discoveries (Snohvit, Castberg, Havis, Goliat) conventional exploration models; Late Neogene uplift and erosion, huge area, limited data; South Barents south east total frontier zone.

Cost levels, lack of infrastructure, and too much bad news at the same time. Gas discoveries create dry spells in continued exploration. One clear risk/opportunity: Norway will reach production maturity in mid 2020s, need for new gas that will utilized this infrastructure, especially liquid gas. Connecting Barents with the Norwegian infrastructure system. Infrastructure key to value creation. In the past, private investors always had interest in constructing infrastructure, in the North sea, large anchor fields created an interest. Today, commercial entities not interested in investing 5-6% returns on pipelines to create the infrastructure required to move forward on Barents. One of the difficulties in Norway, is that politics is difficult to step out in front of projects, to be a front runner on investments, there is the debate on social distribution. Debate over whether the State and Ministry step up to create the infrastructure to unleash activity and value creation from Barents area. Another discussion on special incentives such as Snohvit, special production allowances.

Q&A How decisions can be made with several degrees of uncertainty: Priorities, driven by the ambition to replenish – but there are forces against (cash flow, investor sentiments — the most moving audience of all, because if you fail to deliver on the quarterly the CEO gets fired).

Unique cost drivers in Norway, nothing to be proud of, operating drilling more expensive than anywhere else, a need to get productivity up, no way it should take 50 percent more time to an engineering design for a semi than required. Mobilize as an industry.

To early to have the discussion about how to connect the Barents. Looking to have more exploration before any kind of determination can take place.


Keynote Session:
Will Commercial Success Follow Exploration Success In The Barents Sea?
Terje Flaten, 23R Project Manager, Statoil
Statoil’s approach to Barents Sea exploration from play validation to exploration focus
Barents Sea Southeast 3D seismic cooperation project
Development challenges and commercial hurdles

Will commercial success follow exploration success. Myths or Facts: Developing Barents Sea discoveries commercially requires — much bigger discoveries than anywhere elsewhere; massive development of new technologies; completely different methods for oi spill handling; new solutions for escape, evacuation and rescue, management of ice totally unique.

First oil production will be at Goliat. Exploration conventional seismic and mapping early discoveries. Periodic and underexplored

Steps to commercial success in the NCS/BS — (1) Big discoveries (high resolution seismic acquisition solution; triassic reservoir presence and quality): How big is big — 150-300 million barrels represents the threshold; key issues is how to build out hubs and field centers. (2)Political acceptance and license to operate: Trust, transparency (distance and temperature, people in extreme cold; robust oil spill contingency – barriers to recover spilled oil and barriers in the well to prevent oil spill) (3) new technology: Horizontal drilling in shallow reservoirs (time and cost, overburden stability, happening in Hoop, Bjarmeland, BSSE); handling of produced water (clean water discharge, everywhere); new sub-sea solutions (incremental development needed. Away from North Sea Standards where they are not needed) (4)industry cost level: Positive oil price development – however more expensive reserves erode returns. Cost per barrel increasing. Restoring the returns: Standard solutions adapted to sub-surface and surface conditions: drilling costs and efficiency, leaner facility concepts, replicated and standard packages, wider industry co-operation, reuse. Last decade – oil price tripled, development costs doubled.

Cooperation: BSSE 3D Group Shoot: Authority guidance;encouragement, attractive business model, equal and low costs (no volume disc out, fair price differentiation between EP and LP, room for different company strategies and prioritization); Involvement in decision making and survey design.


“Business Card Exchange”
“Take advantage of this networking opportunity to introduce yourself and exchange business cards with other conference delegates. Start with the people closest to you and then move around the room to learn more about other attendees and their companies and projects.”


The Role of Structural Geology In Success-Failure Analysis – Examples From the Barents Sea
David Jackson, Global Manager Multi-Client New Ventures, Dolphin Geophysical
Understanding the present day architecture of the petroleum system
How has the petroleum system developed through time
Understanding the role of key tectonic events in changing the petroleum system
The communication of geological understanding and rationale to non-geologists


Understanding the Barents Sea’s Unique Petroleum System: Source Rocks
Tommy Samuelsberg, Exploration Manager Barents Sea, North Energy
Understanding the unique petroleum system in the Barents Sea
Exploring which source rocks exist in the Barents Sea
Underlining the quality and nature of source rocks in the Barents Sea
Play models in the Barents Sea

Exploration history of South-Western Barents Sea; Play models in the Barents Sea (Permian, Triassic, Jurassic, Late Cretaceous/Paleocene); Petroleum systems. First discoveries 1981 (Alke South, askeladden); Albatross (1982) and Snøhvit (1984) – 8th rounds..


Networking lunch break


Ice, Erosion and Broken Plates: Unravelling the Tectonothermal Effects on the Barents Sea’s Petroleum System
Ebbe Hartz, Chief Geologist, Det Norske
Late Cenozoic uplift and erosion in Barents Sea’s petroleum models
The geodynamic challenges of deposition, uplift and erosion of the assumed overburden
The different petroleum models that result from reducing erosion estimates by considering the effect of glaciation and continental break-up. Hans introduces Ebbe as a ski champion – “I will speak without using the microphone, and will do so until they fix the computer [PPT – there was some issues with PPT earlier on during the day]…. using Heriksen and friends from Statoil’s Slides to make the presentation.

Ice probably caused significant compaction, thus erosion estimate stop high; Paleo heat suggest less erosion, and may partially have come from break up. Break up hear probably uplifted Svalbard, erosion enhanced this process; Thus, implementing ice loading highly effects petroleum models for the Barents Sea.


Unleashing the Untapped Potential: Reserve Estimates for the Barents Sea
David Poole, VP Exploration & Deputy CEO, Spike Exploration
How can we use resource estimates as a predictive tool in the Barents Sea?
What are the lessons learnt from more mature areas on the Norwegian Continental Shelf and how can these be applied in the Barents Sea?
Applying resource estimations to future strategies and ensuring return on investment, from a Spike perspective

“Back to strategy” – Focus on using historical data in mature basins as predictive tools in the Barents Sea; Analyses of historic exploration performance in UK and Norway used to highlight trends in exploration and yet to find for the different basins; Sources of information includes: exploration wells and NPD.

Early entrance action.

[ed. space of humor- geologist sparring with statistician]


Where Does The Technology Gap Begin In The Barents Sea?
Stig-Morten Knutsen, Head, Roald Amundsen Petroleum Research
Addressing the unknowns of the subsurface and the surface
Knowing how to detect and handle ice
Overcoming environmental and technological risk and uncertainty

What’s with the Barents Sea”
Circum-Arctic setting
Challenges
Data and subsurface

Technology: The application of scientific knowledge for practical purposes especially in industry. Five Norwegian Partners in Roald Amundsen: U Tromsø, U Stavanger, IRIS, Norut, Akvaplan-niva.

Proven plus probable discovered Arctic resources (2P) – Barents – A far north area without some of the extreme far north issues. Barents: as a step stone to the circum Arctic (offshore).

Subsea challenges – Temperature. Hydrates and flow assurance. Topside challenges (drilling rigs are more expensive due to winterization features).

Seismic affect on mammals in Greenland – Big discussion when you get to ice affected waters how marine mammals are affected by seismic acquisition AND who oil spill will be looked at; emergency evacuation.

Contemporary 3rd and 4th wave of Barents development having to do with knowledge and information. First wave, Snøvit; Second wave during the 1990s up to 2000 discovery of Goliath.

Referring to Nansen — sometimes the model is important, sometimes the data is important.


Roundtable Discussions
Moderated roundtable discussions to allow in depth discussion and debate around a variety of topics. Delegates will choose one roundtable and use this opportunity to ask questions and discuss the key exploration challenges of operating in the Barents Sea.
1. Exploring for gas and the lack of infrastructure in the Barents Sea. A catch 22?
Led By: David Poole, VP Exploration & Deputy CEO, Spike Exploration
2. What are the key technological obstacles the industry needs to overcome to make developments in the Barents Sea?
Led By: Stig-Morten Knutsen, Head, Roald Amundsen Petroleum Research
3. How does exploration in the Barents Sea differ to exploration in other regions?
Led By: Denis Francois, Director Geosciences, TOTAL

Closing Remarks from the Chair

Close of Conference Day One and Networking Drinks

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »