Another Perspective

By Andy Hill

Like most manufacturing industries, the processes involved in the construction of high quality carbon steel pipe can make it a hazardous job. But, an effective health and safety policy can significantly reduce the risks involved.

Pipe mills are equipped with heavy and automated machinery, including Over Head Cranes, forklift trucks and wagons. Fast-moving and heavy pipes averaging 5 tonnes move along conveyors and across benches, with hot processes as well as cold deployed. Add people to the mix, with their own “habits,” and the potential for hazards is clear.

However, with good control of operations, through procedures and work instructions, effective systems and processes, supported by thorough training and appropriate behavior means a safe place to work is created.

In the past, poor management control, a focus on productivity above safety, coupled with a macho image of ‘steel men’ resulted in practices that we were not prepared to tolerate. This and the demands of the oil and gas industry for ever-higher safety standards, led to the establishment of our first formal safety program in 1995.

Three clear staged improvements are visible that demonstrate an improvement in performance followed by a plateau.

Phase 1: Formalization and Structure - 1995 to 2000

The first 5-year plan established a structure to the process of improving health and safety. Priorities were agreed and set as management objectives, and communicated to the workforce. Areas of focus included:

• Safe access and egress to workplace

• Slips trips and falls

• Compliance with PUWER, Provision & Use of Work Equipment Regulations

• Introduction of a near miss systems and a plethora of control measures.

To monitor progress we were audited and attained safety standard ISRS level 4 in 1998, recognizing the work done to improve overall performance. However by 2000 the improvements had plateaued.

A significant intake of new recruits resulted in a major increase in incidents. CTE undertook a full revamp of training material and methods for training and testing competence. This focus has had, and continues to support, the improving trends in our health and safety performance. However, a key initiative at this time focused on 2 elements:

• Visiting other sites and business to observe best practice and where possible incorporating into our own plans

• Using DuPont (what is this? DuPont are a company widely acknowledged as industry leaders in safety) to assist us in developing a behavioral auditing program and regime that targets unsafe behavior.

Phase 1 saw us build a solid platform by focusing on strong systems. But we had not addressed directly the behavioral issues. By Phase 2 the culture was starting to improve in terms of attitude at all levels to the importance of health and safety. We were moving into the independent cultural phase (see Figure 2).

This trend was illustrated by a growing number of employees who were starting to report any form of unsafe situation and their refusal to accept unsafe practices. But within five years performance had started to plateau once again. A positive and important factor was that initiatives already introduced were being sustained but the downside was that they alone were unable to take us forward on the next step.

Phase 3: Safety Absolutes and Brothers Keeper - 2005 to 2010

A review carried out in 2007 showed that the most common cause of significant accidents in the preceding 18 months, all had a link to failings associated with immobilization of area, when carrying out the required task. This in spite of

• Systems in place, where every area/ job had its own unique immobilization switch to make the job safe

• The focus on improving the culture of safety within the mill

With so much work already done in this area, the decision was made to make this a cardinal rule or safety absolute. Thus any employee going into their work area to carry out a task on the product had to ensure the bench was immobilized, visibly denoted by a red/ green light system. Failure to comply would result in disciplinary action

This approach served to act as a catalyst to bring about changes in both management and shop-floor attitude that in turn, lead to the next significant step in our health and safety performance. Moreover, as our safety culture continued to mature, supported by regular communications, involvement and campaigns, health and safety has become a priority where even ‘steel men’ believe that you expect to come to work and NOT be injured. We are moving into the interdependent culture, where operators will tell colleagues not to do something that is unsafe because they know it the right thing to do - for themselves and others.

Fig 2 represents the changes in culture an organization must experience over time, if it is to achieve an improvement in health and safety performance.

Natural instincts. In an environment with poor or no safety control the culture is one of self preservation based on natural instincts

Supervision. Employees are in a dependent culture where they do what they are told, whether they believe it to be right or not, and no more

Self. Independent culture, here employees are involved in health and safety initiatives and raise concerns because they believe it is the right thing to do. They perceive health and safety as an important feature and want to improve the safety of their workplace. Here the individual tends to worry about himself only.

Team. The last phase of the cultural journey moves into one of interdependency, were employees believe fully in the importance of health and safety and are concerned for the safety of others, as well as themselves. The Brother’s Keeper approach is commonplace and zero tolerance to unsafe acts/conditions is the norm.

Finally in this period we have achieved OHSAS 18001. The structured audit system helps prevent complacency and continually asks what are we doing to improve.

Phase 4: 2010 and beyond

We believe we are moving towards this interdependent culture, but accept there is no room for complacency and there is still much more to do.

Greater attention to the management of change, training, increasing number of safety absolutes, and to PPE (Personal Protective Equipment) are all areas that need more consideration.

The journey towards greater health and safety is an ever-evolving process. We improve by sharing learning and identifying best practice among others, because the standards that are considered acceptable today may not be tolerable to future generations.

Andy Hill, operations manager, SAW Mills, Corus Tubes

by Peggy Williams

By Catherine Madden

After attending the Microsoft Worldwide Partner Conference last month, it was impossible to not think about how cloud computing will impact the oil and gas industry. Are oil and gas companies well positioned to take advantage of cloud computing as a viable option to decrease complexity within their IT environment? Are the opportunities for oil and gas companies around cloud computing associated with a private or public cloud?

Cloud computing has many dimensions. In simple terms, IDC defines cloud services to be business and consumer products, services, and solutions delivered and consumed in real time over the Internet. The public cloud is a deployment model that entails the cloud being open to a largely unrestricted universe of potential users; designed for a market, not for a single enterprise. Whereas, the private cloud deployment is designed for restricted access to a single enterprise (or extended enterprise); an internal shared resource, not a commercial offering; an IT organization as “vendor” of a shared/standard service to its users. Given the current investment and existing IT infrastructure, and the concerns for security when sharing information, the private cloud is the strongest direction for oil and gas companies.

The “Private Cloud” is the evolution of “IT as a Service” as the next wave of isolation from hardware. And, just-in-time provisioning and scaling are key aspects of the private cloud. The most significant drivers for a private cloud approach in oil and gas include:

* Lower IT costs
* Eliminating lag time to launch applications
* Interoperability between applications on private, public and on-premise applications

IDC Energy Insights believes oil and gas companies will leverage the investment that they have made in IT by adopting a private cloud model. Private clouds will require access to a self-service portal, and these management portals should have a fairly high level of automation. IDC’s research indicates that there is rapid growth in spending for virtual machines. Virtualization has brought cloud computing opportunities to the forefront. Oil and gas companies that have a virtualization strategy are better positioned for configuring, protecting data (not just back-up and stores), and as well as how to automatically provision for a cloud strategy. For oil and gas companies, some of the key concerns are identity federation (private VLANS and firewalls), security (shared hardware pools), and management for a cloud strategy.

Right now, the largest oil and gas companies could gain the most from a private cloud model. Because of IT investment already made by these size companies, a private cloud model supports a higher level of flexibility, and more control (full access to all the bits and components) as opposed to a shared services model, and at the same time, they are coming up on the learning curve in a familiar environment. In the area of upstream, opportunities for on-demand computing for reservoir management where there is still too much data – makes the private cloud attractive. It’s an on-demand, elastic environment.

IT’s role is evolving as the provider and supplier of technology services. And, the data center of the future will be built on a converged infrastructure (includes storage, servers, network, and management software).

Are you investing in a private cloud strategy? What types of security concerns may prevent your organization from investing in a cloud strategy?

For the original link to this blog, visit:

http://idc-insights-community.com/posts/5db5247ac5

Catherine Madden of IDC Energy Insights

By Coley Dale

China is expected to surpass Japan as the world’s second-largest national economy after the U.S. and is an increasingly important manufacturing and trading hub for American companies. Yet, traveling there on business can present unfamiliar challenges and opportunities. After seven years of working in China, here are my recommendations for an effective, economical and enjoyable trip:

1. Money and Credit Cards
Arrive with cash that you can exchange for local currency, required for incidentals like cabs and other transportation. Money is easily exchanged at the airport and most hotels. American ATM cards connected to major networks work in most large Chinese cities. Hotels, restaurants, tour companies, and shops in the larger cities will accept most major credit cards, but it is wise to carry two different types such as a Visa and MasterCard. Also, be aware that many businesses impose a surcharge for the use of foreign credit cards so paying cash can provide a cost savings.

2. Communications
Even if it is possible to use your existing cell phone and carrier, roaming charges can be expensive. Check your carrier’s rates from China before traveling. If you have a China-compatible SIM card phone (call your carrier to check), you can easily buy a prepaid SIM card to replace your current SIM card. A more expensive option is to buy prepaid phone cards which are sold throughout China and can be used from most phones. One of the most economical communications tools is Skype which works over most Internet connections in China. You can call other Skype users throughout the world for free or pay a low rate for most calls to landlines or mobile phones in other countries.

High-speed Internet access is available at most hotels with business customers. Fast WiFi is increasingly common throughout China and can be used for free in many coffee shops and restaurants. And while some U.S. websites like Facebook and Twitter are blocked, accessing and using the Internet in China will seem familiar. (However, be aware that if you use Google the buttons will appear in Chinese characters since searches are routed through Google in Hong Kong.)

3. Hotels
Ninety-percent of hotels in China are not brand names that most Westerners recognize. Yet the country offers a wide range of accommodations that compare favorably with options found in Western countries. Ctrip, China’s largest online travel provider, features the country’s most comprehensive hotel database and an English-language reservations system. It offers the best rates which it backs up with a best price guarantee, and its well-staffed English helpline will provide assistance in communicating with your hotel before, during, or after your trip (helpful for overcoming any language barriers).

4. Flights
The best airfares to China from U.S. cities can often be found with Chinese airlines, which offer some of the world’s newest planes and experienced flight crews. Within China itself, increased competition amongst airlines means that there are many discounts on domestic flights. Ctrip sells more tickets for travel in China than any other website and is quick to post domestic and international airfare deals to help travelers save money.

5. Language
It’s not necessary to speak Mandarin to travel in China, especially in the big cities where there are many English speakers (although it is wise to ask for a card with your hotel’s address on it in English and Chinese to give to taxi drivers for hassle-free cab rides back to the hotel).  However, basic conversational terms can go a long way to making a positive impression on those you meet. Two excellent learning tools are ChinesePod (online language lessons) and Rosetta Stone  (interactive CDs). Or, consider downloading free or low-cost language apps for your smart phone such as those from Odyssey Translator and WorldNomads which translate basic words and phrases from English into Mandarin.

For additional tips on planning a business trip to China, visit http://bit.ly/chinatips.

Coley Dale is the senior business development manager for the English language version Ctrip, China’s largest online travel provider. He has lived in China for seven years and has traveled extensively in 16 of China’s 22 provinces.

By Dr. Bernard L. Weinstein

The Deepwater Horizon incident in the Gulf has moved our country into crisis mode, and the public’s attention is, not surprisingly, focused on Washington’s response. Certainly, our government has the responsibility to mitigate a disaster with such devastating economic and environmental consequences. However, lawmakers should tread lightly and be careful not implement punitive policies that would inflict further economic harm on the Gulf region and the nation. Unfortunately, the administration and Congress’ response to the spill may well amplify the economic distress already afflicting the Gulf Coast states. And it could impose significant costs on the entire American economy as well.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar got the ball rolling by calling for a six-month moratorium on current drilling activity in the Gulf, in contradiction to the recommendations of seven drilling experts he had consulted for advice.  President Barack Obama kept it moving by reiterating support for the House passed cap-and-trade bill in his June speech regarding the disaster and advocating “the need to end America’s century long addiction to fossil fuels.” And now Congress has stepped to the plate with members proposing a variety of new legislation to tax oil profits at higher levels, to impose a 49-cents a barrel fee to be used to replenish and expand the accident liability fund, and to require new regulations to drill relief wells.

None of these initiatives is cost free, and most will do more harm than good.

Obama’s renewable energy plan won’t end America’s need for fossil fuels anytime soon according to the Energy Information Administration. And therein lies the problem of moratoria and bans on oil development in America’s coastal waters.  Offshore oil operations in the Gulf of Mexico currently generate US $85 billion in annual economic activity as well as $6 billion in royalties to the federal treasury.  The loss of this spending will destroy thousands of jobs in Gulf Coast communities, and the ripple effects will be felt across the nation.

History tells us that governments tend to react to crises and disasters with bad public policies. In the case of energy, this has been proven over and over. Take, for example, gasoline rationing and price controls.

J. Howard Marshall II, who had proposed price fixing in the petroleum industry while still in the academic world, found that they didn’t work when he tried to impose controls in the real world while working for the Roosevelt administration during the Great Depression.  Instead, they created an untraceable black market of so-called “hot oil” that led to serious overproduction. With Marshall’s recommendation, the Roosevelt White House abandoned price controls and instead implemented a system of tenders at refineries.

That lesson was lost by the time Marshall returned to government service in World War II, where the Office of Price Administration set up a rationing system with coupons to control prices. “In almost no time flat, we had coupon inflation … and favoritism, corruption, black markets and futile enforcement efforts,” he writes in his autobiography, Done In Oil.  In both letters and in person, Marshall also tried to warn the first Secretary of Energy James Schlesinger, appointed by President Jimmy Carter, that price controls wouldn’t work.  In the conclusion to his autobiography, he states “As proof of the proposition that you cannot fix oil prices, a Harvard Ph.D. named James Schelisnger and his staff at the Department of Energy tried it and ended up putting the country in the gasoline lines.”

The 15th Anniversary of Marshall’s death will be celebrated this August. A leader and pioneer in the industry, Marshall fought for sensible energy policies. But did government learn from his experiences?  Apparently not.

Much as Secretary Salazar wants a drilling moratorium in the Gulf in response to the BP incident, so the Carter Administration and Congress imposed a moratorium on new nuclear power plants after the overblown Three Mile Island scare.  Much as US oil companies today face punishment for BP’s mistakes, so the Congress imposed a windfall profits tax on US producers in response to the Arab oil embargoes.  And just as Obama wants to spend billions on additional subsidies for renewable energy to wean us from our oil addiction, so President Carter and Congress in the 1970s doled out billions for alternative energy in the name of making America energy independent.

A policy of “no more nukes” resulted in our burning much more coal for power generation that, in turn, has helped create the current sense of climate crisis.  As the Congressional Research Service has documented, the windfall profits tax only served to make the US more dependent on imported oil. And the massive subsidies for renewable energy have to date done nothing to reduce the demand for fossil fuels while adding to America’s large and growing budget deficits.

Rahm Emanual, Obama’s chief advisor, has said, “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.” But Marshall’s lessons inform us that it isn’t a wasted crisis we have to worry about but the waste government will create from the crisis. When will we ever learn from history rather than repeat it?

Weinstein serves as associate director of the Maguire Energy Institute at the Southern Methodist University’s Cox School of Business.

Almost anything we say about the Deepwater Horizon tragedy in the Gulf of Mexico (GoM) may be rendered meaningless by events, so here is an observation that I hope will remain relevant for the long term.

The only people who can fix this are the engineers and scientists in the energy industry.  That should be obvious, but many people are acting as if capping the well and cleaning up the spill were not a scientific, technical, and industrial challenge, but a legal, political, and rhetorical one.

Unfortunately, the physical world, the world of oceans and hydrocarbons does not respond to words. Politicians, lawyers, reporters, commentators all have a role in society, but they have little to offer in this crisis. Displays of anger and finger-pointing will contribute nothing. The people working around the clock to devise solutions are the ones who will stop the flow of oil and clean up the spill.

Do you remember the Apollo 13 story? The astronauts were stranded in space, their craft disabled, in mortal danger. They were completely dependent on the engineers in Houston to find a solution so they could regain control of their ship. The engineers did what engineers always do – they worked the problem until they had the answer. The answer was unorthodox, because it was a unique situation. It wasn’t pretty – I recall it involved lots of duct tape – but it was right for the circumstances.

We are in the same situation now. The brains of our industry have to work this problem until it is solved. There is no alternative. Vilifying the industry, making wild guesses or indulging in uninformed speculation won’t help. We should respect knowledge and talent at work, help where we can, and avoid making their task any more difficult than it already is.

The engineers and scientists will fix this. No one else will.

–Peter Duncan, President – MicroSeismic, Inc.

www.microseismic.com

By Gunjan Bagla

India has a proven reserve of 775 million metric tons of crude oil and 1074 Bcm of natural gas. Compare this with Saudi Arabia, which has the largest crude oil reserves at 276 Bbbl and Russia with natural gas reserves of 47,570 Bcm. India’s undiscovered oil and natural gas is estimated to be several times that of its proven reserves.

Like China, India is not self sufficient in energy production and has to depend on massive imports of oil and natural gas. India imports more than two-thirds of its energy requirements. The huge energy import costs have resulted in consistent trade deficits and the Government of India has been pushing on major exploration projects of oil and natural gas through public sector companies which falls under the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas and through the private sector. All international alliances for projects in the oil and gas sector are approved through the International Cooperation division which functions under the ministry.

Exploration of hydrocarbons in India is covered under the framework of New Exploration Licensing Policy (NELP). Up to 100% foreign participation is allowed under the NELP scheme. After round eight of NELP in April 2009, 33 blocks have been awarded for oil and gas exploration. Cairn Energy of UK was awarded one deepwater and one shallow-water block. BHP Bilton won three shallow water blocks.

However, India’s oil ministry has not been very happy about the response to the last round of NELP. Owing to the poor response in the eighth round, the blocks on offer in NELP IX will be limited to only those where high quality data is available. This is to ensure that E&P firms will show greater interest in the auction with more data now available.

Big exploration firms like ExxonMobil, Chevron, and BP still haven’t shown a great interest in India. NELP IX might see these global giants evaluating the possibility of participating in the bids.

A few Canadian companies are active in the exploration scene in India. Niko Resources from Calgary was one of the earlier successful ones. Niko in 2002, discovered around 7 Tcf of natural gas in participation with India’s Reliance Industries. Canoro Resources is another Canadian company with active E&P interests in India. In May 2009, Essar Oil of India announces that it is tying up with Canoro for exploration of its two blocks which Essar won under round four of NELP. Canoro also made oil discovery in the state of Assam and drilling began in 2008.

India is still dependent on foreign firms to provide with the technology needed for exploration. State owned Oil and Natural Gas Corp. (ONGC) has been in talks with ExxonMobil among others for gas production from the Krishna Godavari basin.
However, the opportunity for ExxonMobil has come in the wake of Brazil’s Petrobras and Norway’s Statoil quitting the block due to the slow approvals and red tape from the government bodies.

Meanwhile, ONGC announced this year that they will invest around US $30 billion over the next 10 years with a target of sourcing oil and gas to the tune of 20 million metric tons only from overseas assets.

Reliance Industries in May 2010 made a major oil discovery in the Cambay basin in Gujarat and the well produced 255 b/d of oil.

Cairn Energy which is well established in India saw its operating revenues in 2009-10 soaring by 45% over the previous financial year. The company has major oil fields in the state of Rajasthan and had a gross operated production of 69,059 boe/d in FY 2009-10.

Gunjan Bagla is managing director at Amritt Ventures Inc.

Excerpted from the “Seis Matters” blog

In recent weeks, I’ve been pondering what impacts the Macondo blowout might have on the seismic industry. A great deal has been written about the impact on overall E&P activity in the Gulf of Mexico (GoM) and the residual fall-out on the oil service industry, including deepwater drillers, marine support vessel operators, and the like.

But I haven’t read all that much in the business or trade press about the potential impacts – good and bad – on the seismic sector. So I thought I’d toss out a few perspectives, and open it up to readers to add their views to the mix.

I believe that seismic players with assets in the Gulf – whether those undertaking surveys when the blow-out occurred or those in possession of multiclient data libraries – will take a near-term hit. With Interior Secretary Ken Salazar insistent that the deepwater drilling moratorium not end before Nov. 20, 2010, there is a lot of uncertainty as to how long it might take for the E&P industry to return to prior levels of activity. Regardless of when the moratorium is lifted, it will take several years for the E&P industry to return to prior activity levels in the GoM.

As we all know, uncertainty tends to prolong buying decisions. So we likely won’t see any new multiclient programs secure the underwriting needed to get started in the Gulf, and we probably won’t see that much in the way of additional sales of GoM data libraries “on the shelf” to E&P companies that don’t already own licenses to them. So existing GoM seismic projects and data libraries may be somewhat “stranded” for the next several quarters and not transact at the levels we’ve seen over the last 18 months. We may, however, see a significant wave of reprocessing activity as E&P operators try to improve upon legacy multiclient data in order to identify and high-grade potential leasing areas or drilling prospects in anticipation of the moratorium being lifted.

Beyond these effects, I actually see a significant amount of upside for our industry. It will be driven by the re-allocation of capital to other geographic regions which, in turn, will drive a need for new seismic data.

We’re already seeing an emerging consensus that onshore E&P projects – especially shale gas plays in the US - will emerge as “winners” in the wake of Macondo. This shift will be driven by the perspective that onshore developments are less technologically daunting, and therefore safer, than those happening under a mile or two of ocean. It will also be driven by the perspective that natural gas is cleaner than oil both on a greenhouse gas basis and on the perceived level of environmental damage that would occur from a blowout of a natural gas (vs. oil) well.

If this resurgence of unconventional gas plays does occur, we’ll likely see a resurgence in new onshore seismic acquisition over these plays in both the US and Canada. It’s likely that BLM and state-driven mandates will require higher quality seismic over the reservoirs being developed than was perhaps the case in the past, along with mandates that environmentally friendly equipment be used during the acquisition operation itself. So this feels like it will benefit seismic contractors with onshore operations in North America – like Conquest, Dawson, Geokinetics, and Global – along with the technology providers of cableless acquisition systems and the companies that have experience in processing and interpreting data from the uncoventional resource plays.

I believe this same resurgence will take place internationally. E&P companies with operations in the GoM will be looking to re-allocate exploration and development capital to other regions in order to sustain their ever-depleting reserve and production base. If you can’t drill in the GoM, you’re going to have to drill somewhere else. We’ve already seen Anadarko, one of the companies with a working interest in Macondo, state that they are going to re-allocate capital internationally. Deepwater rig operators and service companies like Halliburton are re-allocating equipment and personnel in response, and seismic vessel operators are sure to follow.

My guess is that the immediate beneficiaries of this re-allocation will be those seismic companies that have modern, on-the-shelf data libraries that E&P companies can use to guide their re-allocation decisions. As a result, demand for international data is likely to increase, whether that data is basin-scale and helps an E&P operator determine whether (for example) West Africa is more attractive than Indonesia, or the data is more localized and helps an E&P operator identify where to drill a well on an overseas lease that is already held (using capital that would have previously been used to drill a well in the GoM).

As the year wears on, I think we may see a ramp-up in data library licensing. First, we’ll see capital “freed up” from drilling programs (or new lease sales) in the GoM that can no longer proceed. This capital may be readily deployed to other regions but, in many cases, the E&P operators are going to need more information (over and above what they already possess) before they feel comfortable making an overseas leasing or drilling decision. I wouldn’t be surprised to see the freed-up capital move into seismic data library licensing later in 2010, in support of additional leasing and drilling activity in 2011 and beyond.
One can imagine that, in the longer run, the re-allocation of capital beyond the Gulf of Mexico and to international plays will drive a new wave of seismic acquisition, processing, and interpretation, both in proprietary and multiclient formats. Again, that is good news for our industry.

In the longer run, it is my opinion that deepwater development in the Gulf will recover, albeit with a much higher operating cost base and increased levels of government scrutiny. I personally believe that E&P operators will be required to have much more insight about the reservoirs they are drilling into to obtain permits (along with using larger and more redundant blowout preventers, enhancing their oil spill response programs, etc.).

From the point of view of our industry, more insight into the “reservoir targets to be drilled” likely involves a shift towards proprietary, reservoir-targeted seismic programs acquired and imaged with the most modern technologies (e.g., complex multivessel geometries, streamer steering, reverse time migration processing, seabed or node-based acquisition where possible) and a corresponding shift away from large, multiclient 3-D programs that aren’t designed to illuminate a specific reservoir target or play. This will eventually restore seismic activity levels in the Gulf at least to prior levels, and perhaps beyond, as E&P operators need to satisfy government-mandated reporting requirements on what they are planning to drill before they spud the well.

But government reporting won’t be the only driver of proprietary, reservoir-focused imaging programs. As the regulation-driven costs of offshore exploration and development go up, the average cost of the “typical well” will go up also. Before Macondo, an offshore well in the Gulf of Mexico might have cost US $100 million. What will it cost to drill now?

Whatever the increase might be, the economics of each well will become more marginal. There will be an even greater premium on drilling fewer wells to develop a reservoir, because each incremental well bears a $40 billion “Macondo risk.”  And who will stand poised to help the E&P operators figure out where to optimally target their scarce drilling dollars into the sweet spots of the reservoir?  The seismic industry.

Things certainly look dark at the moment, but I can imagine the dawn of opportunity in the quarters ahead. What do you think the future holds for the seismic industry in a post-Macondo world?

For more, visit http://blog.iongeo.com/

By William O’Keefe

The oil spill tragedy unfolding in the Gulf of Mexico has illustrated to the general public a fact those in America’s energy industry have always known. The oil business is difficult, risky, and dangerous. As such, it’s critical to routinely reevaluate and improve methods and technologies. The record of industry performance and accomplishment in hostile environments, in spite of this tragic spill, is testimony to that commitment.

The life and legacy of one of our industry’s titans, Red Adair, demonstrates that with a mix of ingenuity, persistence, and bravery, we can better protect both workers and the environment while still providing affordable oil and natural gas, as long as America and the rest of the industrialized world needs it. And, it is a indisputable fact that our economy will need affordable oil for decades to come.

Paul N. “Red” Adair was born in Houston in 1915. After quitting high school during the Great Depression to go to work and help support his family, he served in the US Army with a bomb disposal squadron during World War II. Leaving one risky job for another, he went to work for Myron Kinley — the original pioneer of oil well fire and blowout control.

Risk is an inherent factor of life. Eliminating risk in almost any activity — from driving a car to making a sandwich — is impossible. Instead, we must identify the greatest and/or most likely risks and then figure out the best means of managing and mitigating them. And that’s how Adair made his living.

Adair not only anticipated risks but also developed new and improved ways of dealing with them, revolutionizing the art of controlling oil well fires and other related disasters. He was instrumental in the development of semi-submersible firefighting vessels. (Before this, fires were largely controlled by explosives or relief wells.) Adair was also behind Aramco’s multiservice vessel Queen Mary plus two fireboats and Rapid Intervention Vessels that controlled the IXTOC blowout in the Gulf of Mexico in 1980, the second largest oil spill (and largest accidental spill) on record until today.

Adair was there for the biggest spill as well, the catastrophe intentionally perpetrated by Saddam Hussein as his forces retreated during the Gulf War in 1991. His company capped 117 wells in the Iraqi desert, accomplishing a job in six months that many thought would take as long as five years and averting an international ecological disaster.

It goes without saying that it’s because Adair and other tenacious leaders in the US energy industry that more than 40 years passed between the last production incident in 1969 and this year’s Deepwater Horizon accident. In that period, we have drilled over 50,000 offshore wells in US coastal waters and 14,000 deepwater wells worldwide without a serious accident. That is a record of excellence and care – and one we should constantly strive to improve.

Looking back at Adair’s legacy offers insight into the path we must map looking to the future. We’ll need better precautions and systems to prevent accidents and protect sensitive ecological areas. Leasing requirements should reflect site specific conditions, which means that some requirements will be more stringent and some less. In the mean time, our focus should be on stopping the flow of oil, cleaning up the oil now in the water and onshore, restoring damaged areas, compensating those suffering losses, and learning exactly what happened and what can be done to minimize future exploration and production risks.

With the situation confronting us today in the Gulf and other challenges the oil industry will undoubtedly face as the 21st century marches on, we look for the next generation of visionaries like Red Adair. They are the men and women who will conceive the new technologies and practices we will need to meet the world’s unceasing demand for energy.

William O’Keefe, chief executive officer of the George C. Marshall Institute, is president of Solutions Consulting Inc.

By Sam Kannappan

Does multitasking increase efficiency? I think multitasking does not result in significant improvement. But on the other hand it is even dangerous. The term multitasking came from the computer industry. Only one task is active at a time. But tasks are rotated through many times in a short time in single core microprocessors.

In Human multitasking, people take longer to complete tasks and are predisposed to error. The brain is compelled to restart and refocus. If both tasks require selecting and producing actions, severe interference occurs. Action planning represents a “bottleneck.” The human brain can only perform one task at a time. Lapse of attention or absent mindedness can result from multitasking.

If the above is true, then why do we believe that people who multitask are able and efficient. It is possible to switch between simple non-competing tasks and have minimum disruption. Time management also helps to do any task efficiently. Benefits of time management is sometimes misunderstood to be from multitasking.

Question: There was a chess master once who would play 10 different players simultaneously, and win every time. Was he “Multitasking” or engaging in “time management?”

Sam Kannappan, Consulting Engineer