Thursday, January 1, 2015

Noble Energy freezes talks with Israel Shipyards | Globes

Noble Energy freezes talks with Israel Shipyards

Tamar


Noble is suspending negotiations for the NIS 15 million deal until the future of Israel's natural gas industry becomes clear.


Noble Energy Inc. (NYSE: NBL) is suspending its negotiations with Israel Shipyards until the future of the natural gas industry in Israel becomes clear, according to a letter sent this week to Israel Shipyards' management.
The negotiations are for a seven-year extension of the lease for the base of Noble Energy's marine activity. The base area covers 28 dunam (seven acres), for which Noble Energy would have paid over NIS 15 million a year for more than five years.
Antitrust Authority director general David Gilo decided last week to revoke a compromise reached with the Leviathan partnership in which the partnership would have sold two smaller gas reservoirs, Karish and Tanin, while retaining the larger Leviathan reservoir.
Following the decision, Noble Energy chairman and former CEO Charles Davidson stated, "The actions of the Antitrust Authority are another disturbing example of the uncertain regulatory environment in Israel." Noble Energy president and CEO David Stover added that the company was disappointed with Israel and the Antitrust Authority director general, and had decided to suspend its investments in Israel.
Published by Globes [online], Israel business news - www.globes-online.com - on January 1, 2015
© Copyright of Globes Publisher Itonut (1983) Ltd. 2015

Source: http://www.globes.co.il/en/article-noble-energy-freezes-talks-with-israel-shipyards-1000997824

Wednesday, December 31, 2014

US encourages Noble Energy gas deals in Mideast | Kuwait News Agency (KUNA)


31/12/2014   |   09:09 AM | World News
تصغير الخطتكبير الخط
WASHINGTON, Dec 31 (KUNA) -- The US government on Tuesday said it encourages the signing of gas deals in the Mideast with Texas-based company Noble Energy.

"We continue to engage and we support all parties to move forward with the natural gas deal signed between Noble Energy and entities in Jordan and Egypt," the State Department's Director of Press Relations, Jeff Rathke, told reporters. "We strongly believe that these deals would enhance energy security in the region."

He added that Secretary of State John Kerry "discussed these issues" with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, while the US Special Envoy and Coordinator For International Energy Affairs, Amos Hochstein, met with the Israeli energy minister Silvan Shalom this week.

"We think it is important for all countries to have a strong investment climate, including a consistent and predictable regulatory framework," Rathke said. "We also think energy discoveries in the eastern Mediterranean can and should be used for strengthening collaboration and cooperation." (end) ys.tg


Source: http://www.kuna.net.kw/ArticleDetails.aspx?id=2416851&language=en

Tuesday, December 30, 2014

Φώτα ξεκινά η νέα γεώτρηση στο κοίτασμα «Αμαθούσα» | ΦΙΛΕΛΕΥΘΕΡΟΣ

Saipem 10000

Φώτα ξεκινά η νέα γεώτρηση στο κοίτασμα «Αμαθούσα»

  
   0   0
Λευκωσία: Ανήμερα των Φώτων είναι προγραμματισμένη να ξεκινήσει η νέα γεώτρηση του Saipem 10000 στον στόχο «Αμαθούσα», κρατώντας για το επόμενο τρίμηνο και συγκεκριμένα μέχρι και τις 19 Μαρτίου όλους τους ενδιαφερόμενους σε αγωνία.

Σύμφωνα με τις πληροφορίες του «Φ», το Saipem 10000 ολοκληρώνει μέσα στις επόμενες 48 ώρες τις διαδικασίες ασφάλισης και δοκιμών της γεώτρησης στον «Ονασαγόρα» και προετοιμασίας για τη μετακίνηση σε απόσταση 55 χιλιομέτρων νοτιοδυτικά του σημείου γεώτρησης στον «Ονασαγόρα», κοντά στα σύνορα του τεμαχίου «9» με το τεμάχιο «12» και περίπου 30 χιλιόμετρα από το σημείο της δεύτερης γεώτρησης στο «Αφροδίτη».

Τα ελικόπτερα και τα ειδικά πλοία που εξυπηρετούν καθημερινά το γεωτρύπανο, θα διανύουν περίπου 155 χλμ. (84 ν.μ.), που είναι η απόσταση μεταξύ λιμανιού Λάρνακας και του γεωτρύπανου, δηλαδή οι χρόνοι πτήσεων και πλεύσης αντίστοιχα θα αυξηθούν κατά 30% περίπου.

Σύμφωνα με δύο νέες οδηγίες προς αεροναυτιλλομένους και ναυτιλλομένους που εξέδωσε χθες η Κυπριακή Δημοκρατία, παρατείνονται τα μέτρα προστασίας του Saipem 10000 με απαγόρευση πτήσεων σε χαμηλό ύψος στην περιοχή, όπως και πλοίων σε μικρή ακτίνα από το γεωτρύπανο στον «Ονασαγόρα» μέχρι το τέλος Ιανουαρίου, ενώ παράλληλα ξεκινούν ανάλογα μέτρα προστασίας στο σημείο γεώτρησης στην «Αμαθούσα».

Ο στόχος της γεώτρησης είναι σε βάθος σχεδόν 2.700 μέτρων κάτω από την επιφάνεια του βυθού σε γεωλογικό σχηματισμό που διαμορφώθηκε αρκετά εκατομμύρια χρόνια πριν τον γεωλογικό σχηματισμό της περιοχής της γεώτρησης στον «Ονασαγόρα».

Το γεγονός ότι πρόκειται για γεωλογικό σχηματισμό που μέχρι τώρα δεν έχει ερευνηθεί με πραγματική γεώτρηση στην περιοχή, καθιστά τη δεύτερη γεώτρηση της ΕΝΙ ιδιαίτερα ενδιαφέρουσα για τους ειδικούς, αλλά και τα προσδοκόμενα αποτελέσματα ακόμα πιο αινιγματικά. Πάντως, οι ενδείξεις από τα δισδιάστατα και τρισδιάστατα σεισμογραφικά δημιουργούν ελπίδες για σχετικά σημαντικό κοίτασμα, αν τελικά αυτό υπάρχει εκεί.

Επίσης, τα αποτελέσματα της γεώτρησης στην «Αμαθούσα» θεωρούνται πλέον εξαιρετικής σημασίας για το μέλλον της υπόθεσης των υδρογονανθράκων για την Κύπρο, σε αντίθεση με τη γεώτρηση στον «Ονασαγόρα», που δεν ήταν ζωτικής σημασίας. Τα αποτελέσματα θα κρίνουν και τα επόμενα βήματα της ΕΝΙ, που έχει προγραμματίσει ακόμα δύο γεωτρήσεις, πλέον πολύ πιο κοντά στις κυπριακές ακτές, η διάταξη των οποίων θα καθοριστεί ανάλογα με τα αποτελέσματα της γεώτρησης που ξεκινά τα Φώτα.

Με εξαιρετικό ενδιαφέρον αναμένει τα ευρήματα από τη γεώτρηση στο «Αμαθούσα» και η γαλλική Total, αφού και στα τεμάχια 10 και 11 που έχει τα δικαιώματα, υπάρχουν αρκετά γεωλογικά αινίγματα ως προς την ενδεχόμενη διαμόρφωση κοιτασμάτων, κάποια από τα οποία ενδεχομένως να επιλύσει η γεώτρηση του Saipem 10000.

Στο μεταξύ, ο μέχρι τώρα προγραμματισμός είναι εν μέρει ρευστός, αφού η επεξεργασία των γεωλογικών δεδομένων από τη γεώτρηση στον «Ονασαγόρα» που θα ολοκληρωθεί σε έξι εβδομάδες περίπου, ενδεχομένως να δώσει πιο πλήρη εικόνα για τη γεωλογική διαμόρφωση σε όλη την περιοχή, οπότε και μπορεί να αλλάξει ο προγραμματισμός. Να σημειωθεί ότι το Υπουργείο Ενέργειας έχει μέχρι στιγμής εγκρίνει στην ΕΝΙ ακόμα δύο γεωτρήσεις μετά τον «Ονασαγόρας» και την «Αμαθούσα», με τους άλλους δύο στόχους να είναι ο «Ζήνων» και ο «Κινύρας».

Γράφει: Πέτρος Θεοχαρίδης
- See more at: http://www.philenews.com/el-gr/top-stories/885/235141/fota-xekina-i-nea-geotrisi#sthash.cTUsZFKV.dpuf



Source: http://www.philenews.com/el-gr/top-stories/885/235141/fota-xekina-i-nea-geotrisi

Monday, December 29, 2014

Israel's Pipe Dreams | Jerusalem Post

Israel's Pipe Dreams

     
    Since 2009, conversation surrounding the massive hydrocarbon fields Tamar and Leviathan focused on two core questions: how to distribute the gas between domestic and foreign markets, and how to ensure that the profits were enjoyed by future Israeli generations.

    Monopolization of the energy industry by its two core companies, US-based Noble Energy and the Delek Group, was seemingly a side issue.

    However, with the December 23 announcement by the Antitrust Authority that Noble and Delek must dissolve their monopoly of Israel’s gas supply, not only must the highly anticipated distribution of gas to the Israeli public be put on hold, but export to foreign markets must be postponed as well. Both of these two issues could have far-reaching political ramifications.

    Noble Energy is a crucial player in the Eastern Mediterranean, and despite a myriad of geopolitical challenges the American company assumed a leading role in the discovery of hydrocarbons in the Levant basin. Noble clearly intended on finding a joint strategy for both Israeli and Cypriot offshore gas, which would serve both their domestic needs and potentially reach a European market desperate to find alternatives to Russian energy.

    After several years of lockstep partnership with the Israeli government, Noble is threatening to reconsider its stake in Israeli energy. Bini Zomer, Noble’s director of corporate affairs in Israel, told Channel 2 that the Antitrust Authority’s decision “casts a dark shadow on the future of the gas and oil industry in Israel and will affect Noble Energy’s investments in the country.”

    What does this mean? Gal Luft of the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security explains that turning its back on Noble is a major risk for Israel’s energy prospects. Rumored to having been mistreated by Israel’s flawed bureaucratic system, if Noble is forced to walk away from its multi-billion dollar investment, it will be difficult for other companies to consider approaching the Israeli market.

    Noble could also cause future headaches if and when Israel and Cyprus attempt to deliver gas to the European market via a pipeline. In fact, Noble could propose a more economical Cyprus to Europe pipeline that excludes Israel entirely.

    Not only would this impact Israel-Cyprus relations, which have experienced a dramatic upswing since the discovery of offshore gas, but it could also conceivably draw Israel and Turkey back together.

    The decision could additionally impact agreements Israel has made with Jordan ($15 billion), the Palestinian Authority ($1.2b.) and Egypt ($500 million-700 million), all of whom are starved for gas, and resisted significant Islamist opposition in order to secure Israel’s energy reserves. A delay in the arrival of affordable energy could damage the credibility of those governments in the eyes of their respective publics.

    More importantly, Noble’s early exit from the Israeli energy scene will create a vacuum in the energy industry. As one of the few oil and gas companies capable of drilling in deep waters, Noble was unique in that it shared multiple interests, both financial and strategic, with Israel. Who would replace Noble? What would their underlying interests be? If, for the sake of argument, a number of smaller, less significant companies replaced Noble, what extra baggage would Israel then be forced to shoulder? Would it force the termination of Israel’s grander regional energy dreams? There is an abundance of valid arguments against energy monopolization, but the Antitrust Authority’s decision has made maximizing the economic and diplomatic potential of natural gas far more difficult. Now, Israel faces the end of its energy honeymoon.

    Unlike oil, natural gas requires long-term strategic planning between companies and states, and a significant dose of trust. It demands an understanding of the domestic and regional implications if there are bumps along the way.

    What the recent ruling shows is that Israel’s leadership has once again failed to think long term. If it was not interested in engaging in an exclusive relationship with Noble Energy, it should have considered the alternatives many years ago. Failure to find an agreeable settlement that allows Noble to continue playing a central role in the extraction of Tamar and Leviathan will set off tremors with unforeseen consequences. For this reason and others, it is imperative that a resolution is reached as soon as possible.

    The author is a PhD candidate in Government & International Relations at Virginia Tech University and the Israel-Turkey Project Coordinator for Mitvim – The Israeli Institute for Regional Foreign Policies. @GabiMitch


    Source: http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Israels-Pipe-Dreams-386078

    GREEK NATURAL GAS SECTOR IN THE SPOTLIGHT | Natural Gas Europe

    GREEK NATURAL GAS SECTOR IN THE SPOTLIGHT

    A conference on the present-day developments of Greece's natural gas sector and its surrounding region was organized by the Research Centre for Energy Management (RCEM) at ESCP Europe Business School and the Greek Energy Forum (GEF), under the auspices of the Ministry of Environment, Energy and Climate Change, Hellenic Republic. At 'Recent developments in the Greek Gas and Power Markets', various topics were discussed by policy makers and stakeholders both for the state and in the private sector.
    Rudy Van Beurden, Communication and Public Affairs Director of the Belgian company Fluxys paid special attention to the need for establishing a natural gas trading hub in Greece with a regional outlook, so as to stimulate competition, decrease prices, enchase energy security and assist in the spreading the use of gas to both consumers and industry. According to Van Beurden, the market should be liberalized and necessary infrastructure projects should be on track, so as to have a trading hub after all, and Fluxys is committed into assisting Greece, and DESFA in particular, towards that aim.
    Panagiotis Kanelopoulos, CEO of Greece's only fully-private gas trading company, M&M, elaborated on the changing nature of the Greek gas market. For the first time independent players place great importance on LNG trade, which has as a cornerstone the Revythousa LNG terminal, soon to be upgraded and able to periodically serve neighbouring markets as well. He added that more installations are needed if we are to talk about a liberalized, fully-functional market. Interconnectors with the rest of the Balkan countries are a crucial step towards this aim as well.
    The President of DEPA, Giorgos Spanoudis, commented on global energy markets changes. He does not expect US shale gas to reach Europe any time soon, if at all.  Mr. Spanoudis also noted that the demand for gas in Greece has unexpectedly fallen recently by 25%, which is a trend that has not been fully analyzed as of yet with regards to its significance and impact. Moreover, he estimates that by 2015 the local market will be fully liberalized and the country should invest as soon as possible in its own transmission, storage and trade infrastructure, because being part of international pipeline projects by itself is not of great importance if the national gas market is not adequate enough to take advantage. Gas consumption in the country, at the same level today economically as it was in 2005, will see changes implemented to foster gas as a more attractive option, a difficult task now with declining oil prices.
    The head of DESFA, a Greek transmission gas company, Konstantinos Xifaras, pointed out that the regulatory changes that have been gradually implemented in the Greek gas market have made liberalization possible, along with new infrastructure projects, such as the 75% capacity upgrade of the Revythousa terminal and the reverse flow capacity with Bulgaria through the existing pipeline. DESFA also made a recent deal with Fluxys on a future creation of a wholesale trading market in the country, via the establishment of a hub. DESFA has as a main target to accomplish this goal and be part of a regional Southeastern European gas network in which Greece via its LNG projects and inclusion in the Trans-Adriatic Pipeline (TAP), will be able to secure gas needs and push forward integration with its neighbours.
    Greece's Deputy Minister of Energy, Makis Papageorgiou, referred to the strategic role of Greece in gas transactions, citing TAP as a prime example of international cooperation with a leading role for his country. Mr. Papageorgiou emphasized the upgrade of LNG trade, both for local needs and supplying the region. Furthermore for that purpose a second terminal is being prepared for the Northern part of the country to be coupled with the Interconnector Greece-Bulgaria (IGB) and the long-term goal of the corridor Greece-Central Europe through a series of interconnectors between all countries.
    A special focus was also placed on the East Med offshore reserves, which for the MinisterPapageorgiou represents a locale for the alternative supply of the EU through Greece via a proposed pipeline that has already been submitted to the European Commission’s list of projects of common interest.


    Source: http://www.naturalgaseurope.com/greek-regional-natural-gas-sector?utm_source=Natural+Gas+Europe+Newsletter&utm_campaign=3f21af6b0e-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_c95c702d4c-3f21af6b0e-307781293

    Russian project jeopardizes Turkey’s energy advantage | Hurriyet Daily News

    Russian project jeopardizes Turkey’s energy advantage

    Barçın Yinanç - barcin.yinanc@hdn.com.tr

    Russia’s proposal to sell gas to Europe via Turkey with the so-called ‘Turkish Stream’ will jeopardize Ankara’s strategic importance, according to an energy expert. Turkey’s advantage stems from providing an alternative to decrease Europe’s dependence on Russia, says Mithat Balkan, a former Turkish energy envoy

    Accepting Moscow’s proposal would make Turkey even more dependent on Russian gas, says Mithat Balkan adding saying no to Russia would not hamper bilateral ties. HÜRRİYET photos, Levent KULU
    Accepting Moscow’s proposal would make Turkey even more dependent on Russian gas, says Mithat Balkan adding saying no to Russia would not hamper bilateral ties. HÜRRİYET photos, Levent KULU
    Russia’s proposal to sell gas to Europe via Turkey, the so called “Turkish Stream,” to replace the South Stream may jeopardize Turkish interests, according to an energy expert. “Turkey’s advantage is to provide an alternative gas supply to Europe; the Turkish stream will risk this advantage,” said Mithat Balkan, a former ambassador.

    Were you surprised when Russia canceled the South Stream project?

    I was surprised, but it seemed to come with the stance the EU had taken against Russia. With the unbundling issue [EU provision, which requires the separation of gas production and sale operation from the transmission networks, to the effect that a single company may not both own and operate a gas pipeline] and the EU’s strict attitude to not have Russia dominate that part of Europe; it seemed it was going to happen, but such a swift action was a surprise for everyone.

    Where you among those who never believed in the project?


    I was always skeptical about it, but one has to go back to the past to assess the presence. Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) and Baku-Erzurum-Ceyhan (BTE) projects were policy decisions made by Turkey, Azerbaijan, Georgia and the United States with the objective to provide Caucasus and Central Asian energy sources to European markets, which would guarantee their [the energy producing states] independence and to giveEurope and the world an alternative with regard to Russia.

    Then came the Nabucco project. At the beginning, it was United States supporting these projects; the EU was a spectator, it was reluctant vis-a-vis Nabucco, which started with the objective to provide an alternative to Russian gas.

    Then came Russia’s counter moves. Russia’s aim was to bypass Ukraine, as well as to block Nabucco; these two objectives gave life to South Stream. Even at the beginning, South Stream did not seem realistic financially, yet Russia insisted on it for political reasons.

    After a while, the EU came to the picture; when the EU was coming in, United States was going out.

    Was it because of the advent of shale gas?

    It started even before that. Democrats supported these projects and when Republicans came to power they were less supportive, as they considered it the Democrats’ projects. With decreasing U.S. support, the EU’s ambivalent policies and lack of sufficient supply to be provided to Nabuccu, the project faded away. As a result, South Stream came to the forefront and it seemed more probable. Southern European countries had no alternative and had no choice but to accept it. In the meantime; what I call the ‘half-Nabucco,’ TANAP [Trans-Anatolian pipeline project that would carry Azerbaijani gas to Europe via Turkey] came into being.

    TANAP will provide 10 billion cubic meters of gas to Europe and 6 billion to Turkey; but it has the potential for receiving gas from Iran, Iraq and even Turkmenistan. It can be expanded and provide alternative gas to Europe. The EU was not so willing to acceptRussian gas on Russian conditions, so it came out with the idea of conditionality, the unbundling; you cannot own the pipelines, you have to leave the pipeline business to private companies, etc. 

    If Europe had wanted Russian gas, it could have easily provided an exception and some of the European energy companies, like ENİ and others, insisted that this project is being given an exception. But the EU acted on political, rather than economic, grounds.Russian President Vladimir Putin had no alternative but to give up the project.

    Was the EU’s stance hardened due to Russia’s regional assertive policies, like in Ukraine?

    Even before the Ukraine crisis, I believe the EU was motivated by avoiding being too dependent on Russian energy. At the present situation; Russia has decided to provide gas to Europe through Turkey; it will bring it to Thrace. The pipelines will not be under its control; so it would have been the same situation with South Stream, had it accepted European conditions. 

    But what will Turkey gain from it? 

    We don’t know whether EU countries will agree to buy Russian gas, and if so, under what conditions?

    Would any investment be possible without taking into consideration how this gas will be sold and how much of it under what conditions? I believe such investment would not be realistic. There are many that questions need to be answered. 

    In addition, there is the economic situation. Will Russia be able to invest such a deal of money at a time when financing from Western markets is not possible and when theRussian economy is under sanctions?

    I have my doubts about the realization of this so called ‘Turkish Stream.’ In the short term, it might be useful for Turkey. Nobody is sure what will happen in Ukraine. Turkey’s supply line from Ukraine could be interrupted. Although we have Blue Stream, an additional attentive might be useful in the short term.

    But in the long term, the project being actualized could take some time. In addition to that; the 60 billion cubic meters of Russian gas coming to Europe through Turkey will jeopardize the expansion of TANAP.

    I think TANAP will be realized, but what is at risk is the expansion of TANAP; 60 billion plus 16 million; it would be too much. Europe will again be dependent of Russian gas. 

    Looking from this point, we need to ask what Turkey’s importance for Europe is as far as energy is concerned. It is to provide an alternative gas supply to Europe so that it can be independent from Russia. That advantage from Turkish Stream might be at risk.

    It was a political decision perhaps on the part of Turkish government; not seeing a future on its relations with the EU; it might have sought to strengthen its relations with Russia.

    Do you think Turkey no longer values being an alternative energy supply to the EU?

    That would be too strong; Turkey is trying to balance these two interests. Perhaps it also wants to give some messages to the EU.

    But could Turkey say ‘no’ to Russia, when Putin came with this proposal. Can it risk antagonizing Moscow?

    We are already too dependent on Russia, why should we be more dependent on Russia? In addition, Russia and Turkey have always been on good terms, they need to be on good terms. They need each other. All Turkish and Russian governments in the past have been careful not to disrupt their relations in spite their differences on many political issues. They were able to compartmentalize their differences and move forward on issues on which they had mutual interests. I don’t think our refusal would have in any way hampered our relations 

    So Turkey could have said ‘no’ to Russia, without worrying about being antagonizing?

    Look at Russian policies: They proposed a 5 percent reduction in the price of the natural gas they sell us, whereas the oil prices have decreased almost 50 percent and gas prices are usually calculated in accordance with oil prices. This 5 percent reduction is ridiculous; they should have given us this reduction even before oil prices dropped.

    They are bargaining like they are at the Turkish bazaar; that’s not fair and I understand that the Turkish government does not agree and they are trying to increase the reduction. We need to insist on it.

    As a former diplomat, you were part of an establishment for which foreign separate relations with Iraqi Kurds was a taboo; what do you think about the current situation on energy?

    I worked with [former late President Turgut] Özal. I was Özal’s adviser for more than two years. I am a student of Özal in this respect. Özal always had the solution of the Kurdish problem in his mind; to forge strong economic links both with Iraq and northern Iraq. He always said it is through these relations that we can strengthen Turkey. I believe in those policies, so I think, here, the government should pursue the same line. 

    How do you think Turkey’s overall energy policies evolved in the course of, say, the last two decades?

    We have taken very important steps by realizing the BTC and the BTE, as well as initiating TANAP. 

    We are too reliant on Russia. We should limit our reliance on Russia and we need to balance it more carefully. We should not discard Russia; it is an important player both in terms of energy and international politics. But we should play the game taking into account Turkish interests and its relations with both Europe and the West. I think that balance is being disrupted to some extent in favor of Russia.

    Who is Mithat Balkan ?

    HDN

    Born in 1944, former Envoy Mithat Balkan graduated from the University of Ankara’s Faculty of Law in 1967 and entered the Foreign Ministry in 1968.

    He served at the Turkish embassies to Tehran and Washington, at the Turkish delegation to the Council ofEurope and at the Permanent Mission of Turkey to the European Union.

     He served as adviser for foreign affairs to former presidents Turgut Özal and Süleyman Demirel.

     He also served as ambassador to Iran and to Austria, as permanent representative to the World Trade Organization and as the deputy undersecretary for economic affairs. He last served as coordinator and adviser for energy affairs at the Foreign Ministry before retiring in 2007.

    He subsequently worked as a senior adviser at Çalık Enerji until 2011.

    December/29/2014


    Source: http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/turkish-stream-risks-turkeys-advantage-as-an-alternative-to-russia.aspx?pageID=238&nID=76205&NewsCatID=348