Are offshore choppers safe?

30 November, 2009

Federal NDP defence critic Jack Harris appeared before the Wells inquiry and argued the inquiry needs to broaden its mandate and hear testimony from Department of National Defence and Canadian Forces (DND/CF) officials about how search and rescue (SAR) works.

Inquiry commissioner Robert Wells agreed, saying it's hard for him to analyze how well search and rescue works "without knowing exactly what the Department of National Defence SAR does." Wells has asked the DND/CF to provide a witness who can testify about SAR response. To do so, Wells had to check and see if he was overstepping the mandate of his commission -- and has decided he did not overstep.

While that might be good news, it would be better if this inquiry were far broader.

This is a harsh point to make, but the inquiry -- as it is currently constituted -- is very much closing the barn door after the horse has already left.

It's talking about helicopter safety after a specific crash, and that's fundamentally where the inquiry begins and ends.

That's not to say that its work isn't valuable and important. It is. Wells' recommendations will no doubt lead to changes in helicopter travel to and from Newfoundland and Labrador's offshore platforms and may ripple far more widely, making significant changes in other parts of the oil industry -- and perhaps in mining and tourism and other areas where there are significant concerns about helicopter safety.

But it's also a lost opportunity. There are a huge number of areas where offshore safety could be examined -- and could be examined before we have a tragedy that forces more retrospective concern.

Are offshore helicopters safe? Should we be examining ways to make them safer, or should we be asking if helicopters are the best method to transport workers to offshore platforms as well? Are the industry's offshore safety standards capable of withstanding a rigorous review? Are offshore escape systems reasonable and functional? We're already involved in an inquiry where a helicopter crashed -- and that helicopter failed a specific test of its ability to operate with a rapid loss of oil from its main gearbox. The manufacturer walked around that test by sayings the loss of oil was an extremely remote occurrence. Not remote enough, apparently.

In other words, the helicopter was able to meet paper standards and rules, but may not have met the level of performance it needed to.

While we're looking at helicopters, why aren't we looking at the possibility of having performance standards, not only for aircraft, but for escape systems and lifeboats? Do the current life-safety systems work well enough in our particular combination of weather conditions, sea-state, and the sheer distance of our offshore facilities from any kind of help? Are standby vessels able to help, or would they merely be forced to stand by and watch tragedy unfold? Have we met the safety needs offshore, or are we happy enough checking off boxes about the paper standards that are met, all the while turning a blind eye to real-world circumstances?

If there's a problem with this inquiry, it's one that the commissioner has started to spell out: it's limited to a specific event. If we're lucky, the recommendations will help to prevent similar occurrences.

In other words, it will close one barn door.

It just seems like we're content to leave other ones open until they have their own specific disaster to deal with.

-- The Canadian Press

Swiss Offshore Banking

Dispelling myths about Swiss offshore banking and proving that Switzerland is now a compliant and respected offshore jurisdiction

Swiss Offshore Banking A Swiss bank account is often thought of as the dirtiest of naughtiest offshore bank accounts. People seem to assume that if it’s in Switzerland then it is bound to be wrong and all tied up with illegal transactions, privacy and dodgy dealings.

Now whilst we’re quite happy for people to have this perception if it gives them a little thrill, unfortunately the truth is so far from this myth that we thought we’d better tell the truth about Swiss offshore banking in the name of responsible journalism!

Switzerland is not on any black lists for lack of banking compliance, it does not have any anonymous bank accounts in place, it has double taxation agreements in place, and its Federal Department of Finance even welcomed the decisions of the G20 nations to strengthen the stability of financial markets through the introduction of among other things, measures to tighten banking regulations. So what other myths can we dispel about offshore bank accounts in Switzerland…?

You don’t actually have to be a multimillionaire to have a Swiss bank account, anyone can open an account in theory, as long as they comply with the given bank’s ‘know your customer’ due diligence checks for example. People often choose Switzerland as it is considered a politically and economically safe jurisdiction, and if an account holder works abroad in a less than stable nation or earns a wage in a less than stable currency, it can make sense to place one’s banking in a secure jurisdiction.

Depending on which bank and which account you choose, minimum opening balances can be very reasonable, and some accounts don’t even have a requirement for an account holder to maintain a minimum balance once an account is open. So you see, banking in Switzerland can be like banking anywhere else! People just choose the jurisdiction for its security and stability, its reputation and its account offerings.

In the past it was assumed that a bank account in Switzerland was used for one thing only – hiding money. As a result such funds would surely earn no interest and be non investable – again, the truth is a long way from this. Money banked in Switzerland can earn interest, it can be invested, it can be saved, easily accessed, withdrawn and it can even reside in an account on which there are no day-to-day fees. In other words – as boring as it may seem, a Swiss offshore bank account is just like any other offshore bank account!

And finally, a numbered account is NOT anonymous! Yes, you can have a numbered account in Switzerland – this means that your account has a number instead of a name. However, think about it, this number has to relate to someone ultimately doesn’t it, particularly in this day and age of greater transparency and cracking down on money laundering etc. So whilst a numbered account will allow you privacy when you’re carrying out transactions because only a very few select people know the name associated with the account, it will not ‘protect’ anyone in any way if they are attempting to misuse their account.

So, Swiss offshore banking can no longer be thought of as the seedy, dodgy secret of criminals – rather Switzerland’s excellent reputation as a financial centre of stability and privacy means that it maintains a strong presence on the global stage when it comes to winning business from those who want to manage their money through one of the most respected offshore jurisdictions in the world.

source: www.shelteroffshore.com

Associated Industries Counters Sierra Club on Offshore Drilling

Sep 0, 2009

A near-shore drilling measure in Congress has U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson, the Sierra Club and Associated Industries of Florida debating the merits of such a move on the eastern Gulf of Mexico.

Nelson linked the plan for drilling off Florida's coast to national security. "The operative policy and law of the United States is to use much of the eastern Gulf of Mexico as the last remaining training range for our military pilots. Give that up to the oil boys and you sacrifice national security," according to his Web site statement. "Meanwhile, gas prices fluctuate wildly because speculators, who behave like condo-flippers, are allowed to buy and resell oil contracts. Until we stop that, we’ll continue to be gouged at the pump. Congress ought to be looking at that, and at a real alternative energy program - instead of trying to put oil rigs off the world-class tourist spots all along Florida’s coast," he added.

The Sierra Club delivered to Nelson a petition, which the group said has more than 3,000 signatures, in support of his efforts to fight offshore drilling. It also unveiled the report,

"This is the extreme environmental fringe speaking, the 7 percent who will not accept oil production under any circumstances," Bishop said. "The overwhelming majority of people in Florida support offshore production, and their support is growing. By refusing to even discuss a new, necessary and responsible energy policy, drilling opponents are hurting Florida, because we could wind up with zero revenue from the federal government."

Economist Hank Fishkind, principal of Fishkind & Associates, projects that and production could add from $7 billion to $41 billion a year to Florida’s economy, and create from 40,000 jobs to more than 230,000 new Florida jobs.

"We are talking about adding a new industry that could be as important as Florida agriculture. We would get that positive impact in addition to Florida tourism, not to replace tourism. There is a significant benefit to having both industries here, because oil production jobs would pay higher average wages than most service-oriented tourism jobs," Fishkind said.
source: eponline.com

Offshore energy plans scrutinized

September 05, 2009

The waters around the Cape and Islands are awash with ideas for harnessing renewable energy. From a tidal project in Muskeget Channel east of Chappaquiddick Island to ocean-based wind turbines, it is difficult to escape hope-infused plans for a green, energy-filled future.

But over the next month, the action comes onshore during a series of public hearings and conferences on how to mold those dreams into reality. "There's no point in asking someone to evaluate someone else's fantasy," Kitt Johnson, chairman of the Edgartown Energy Advisory Committee, said this week.

In stark contrast to the traditionally slow pace of getting regulatory approval for projects — it can be like "watching grass grow," Johnson said — the Cape and Islands will see a flurry of activity in the offshore renewable energy arena this fall.

On Tuesday, the Ocean Advisory Commission, which includes several Cape and Islands politicians and planners, will meet in Boston to discuss the state's draft ocean management plan. Released in July, the draft plan lays out where ocean projects should and should not be located.

Public hearings follow on the Cape and Vineyard mid-month for anyone who wants to comment on the plan's contents.

On Sept. 17 in Hyannis, the second annual Ocean Energy for New England Conference, hosted by the Marine Renewable Energy Center at the University of Massachusetts in Dartmouth will be held for those interested in planning for projects and the policies that make them possible.

And an Oct. 15 conference in Fall River on renewable energy technology will include information on the type of underwater turbines being considered for the Muskeget Channel project.

The conferences and the state's decision to designate areas off the Cape and Islands for renewable energy development are helpful in getting the public involved, Johnson said.

A final version of the state's ocean management plan is scheduled to be released Jan. 1. An area southwest of the Elizabeth Islands and Nomans Land — a small island three miles off Martha's Vineyard — appears appropriate for up to 170 wind turbines, according to the draft plan.

And, in Muskeget Channel there is enough tidal flow in some areas to generate electricity, said John Miller, director of the Marine Renewable Energy Center.

The renewable energy center is working with Edgartown as the town collects more data on the Muskeget Channel area in exchange for the opportunity to install a permanent stand to test technologies, Miller said. The center, he said, hopes to expand the testing area 30 miles to the south. The National Offshore Renewable Energy Innovation Zone would give researchers a location to test tidal, wave and wind-energy generation technology.

"People need to become more familiar with the technology ... how underwater turbines operate and how they might look," said Mark Forest, chief of staff for U.S. Rep. William Delahunt, D-Mass., who has supported the Marine Renewable Energy Center and more planning for ocean waters.

While Delahunt is often painted as strictly an opponent of the proposed Nantucket Sound wind farm, he has long called for a "time-out" on all such projects until proper federal and state planning can take place, Forest said.

Although generally pleased with the state's draft ocean management plan, local officials are watching closely to ensure state officials consider islanders' concerns.

"The big thing in our minds right now is the definition of 'community benefit,'" said David McGlinchey, executive director of the non-profit Vineyard Energy Project.

The term, a requirement for commercial and small-scale wind turbine projects built in the waters off the coast, is not clearly defined in the draft plan, McGlinchey said.

Next door on Nantucket, officials, who have worked with Edgartown on the Muskeget Channel project, have a broader array of concerns.

The omission from the plan of Nantucket's planning agency raised early alarm bells, said Andrew Vorce, director of the Nantucket Planning and Economic Development Commission.

While assurances by state officials that the island commission will have a voice in local developments are welcome, the waters around Nantucket are largely excluded as the site of potential projects because of bird habitat, Vorce said.

"The mapping of sea duck habitat is a concern for us," he said.
source: www.capecodonline.com

Malaysia's UBG buys stake in Thai offshore blocks

KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 2 (Reuters) - Malaysia's UBG (UBGB.KL) is buying from Abu Dhabi's Mubadala Development stakes in six offshore petroleum concessions in the Gulf of Thailand, said UBG on Wednesday.

UBG was paying $19.2 million for Pearl Thailand, which via its subsidiaries, owns participating interest in the concessions that contain potential new hydrocarbon basins in the Gulf of Thailand, UBG said in a statement.

UBG is buying Pearl Thailand from Pearl Energy, a wholly owned unit of Mubadala, which is the investment arm of the Abu Dhabi government, said the Malaysian firm

Pearl Energy has launched a drilling programme across the blocks which covers a total area of 83,200 square kilometers of under-explored acreage, said UBG.

The production period is for 20 years from the expiry of the exploration period, it said.

UBG is controlled by the family of the chief minister of eastern Sarawak state. The company has in recent years ventured into the construction and water utility sectors after disposing of its stake in Malaysian lender RHB (RHBC.KL) in 2007.

(Reporting by Soo Ai Peng; Editing by Niluksi Koswanage)
source: www.reuters.com