Porti & ambiente — le notizie raccolte

With procurement activity and other pieces being put in place, West Natuna Exploration Limited (WNEL), a majority-owned subsidiary of Singapore-headquartered natural gas player Conrad Asia Energy, is setting the development stage to achieve the first gas production from its natural gas field next year in the West Natuna Sea off the coast of Indonesia, Southeast Asia. Followinga final investment decision (FID)in March 2026, West Natuna Exploration, as the operator of theDuyungproduction sharing contract (PSC) with a 76.5% stake, and its partners,Empyrean Energy( 8.5%) andCoro Energy(15%), set theMako gas projectdevelopment activities in motion with letters of award covering more than $280 million of capital contracts, constituting over 80% of the total capital costs. As a result, letters of award have been issued for the drilling rig, subsea, umbilicals, risers, flowlines (SURF), engineering, procurement, construction, and installation (EPCI), conductor support frame (CSF), EPCT, and all long lead items. The operator has confirmed that several milestone payments have already been made to the contractors, with costs remaining in line with previous guidance. The commercial development of the project in the Riau Islands Province of Indonesia will be done in cooperation with the Indonesian government, WNEL as operator, and PT Nations Natuna Barat (NNB), an entity under Arsari Group, which is expected to become the majority participating interest holder in the Duyung PSC, following a farm-out deal from November 2025. The Mako gas project will initially comprise six development wells tied back to a leased mobile offshore production unit (MOPU), with a design capacity of 172 mmscfd. The sales gas will be transported via an approximately 59-kilometer, 18-inch pipeline to theKF platformin the adjoining Kakap PSC, then through the WNTS pipeline for delivery to the Indonesian domestic market. The supply will be facilitated via a new spur pipeline from the WNTS to Pemping Island, Riau Province, which is being constructed by PLN EPE, a wholly owned subsidiary of PLN Persero. The gas allocation volumes and transportation tariffs within the WNTS have been agreed with SKK Migas and the WNTS joint venture. According to project partners, a formal gas transportation agreement is expected to be executed in the coming weeks. The total capital expenditure to first gas is estimated at $320 million. The Mako gas project is fully funded, including a substantial contingency, and remains on track for first gas in Q4 2027. This content is available after accepting the cookies. Full offtake from Conrad’s Indonesian gas field booked by local utility Under its agreement with Conrad, Empyrean is entitled to 8.5% of all cash payments to WNEL. Located approximately 100 kilometers to the north of Matak Island and 400 kilometers northeast of Batam, the Mako development is described to have a proven reservoir, infrastructure access, and a clear timeline. Gaz Bisht, Empyrean’s Interim CEO, commented:“Empyrean is pleased to note the rapid advancement in development activities at the Makogasfield, with significant procurement activity being undertaken during the March quarter, all fully funded under the previously announcedcarryloanagreement. “Importantly, first production from Mako remains on track to commence late next year, a landmark milestone for all parties involved.” Take the spotlight and anchor your brand in the heart of the offshore world! Join us for a bigger impact and amplify your presence at the core hub of the offshore energy community!

As Australia’s immediate fuel crunch eases aftersuccessful effortsto diversify supply, policymakers are turning their attention to dealing with the next energy security crisis. The question is, what would actually work? The Coalition this weekannounced a policyto double onshore reserves of liquid fuels to 60 days’ supply, or around 1 billion litres of petrol, diesel and aviation fuel. For its part, the Labor governmentis expectedto announce new energy security measures ahead of the budget. Last week, the government canvassed options to refine more fuels in Australia, whether by expanding capacity for the nation’s two remaining fuel refineries following a firethat damagedViva’s Geelong refinery earlier this month, reopening closed refineries, or evenbuilding a new one. Of these options, modestly boosting fuel storage is the only sensible one. The level would need careful calibration. But it cannot stand alone. The Coalition’s plan focuses only on getting back to “normal” – meaning dependent on overseas shipments of fossil fuels – and not on reducing demand through electrification and biofuels. Normal doesn’t exist any more. This year’s energy crisis is the second major disruption in the past five years and looks to befar worsethan the2022 crisis. Much coverage to date has focused on the gap between Australia’sdomestic requirements, known as Minimum Stockholding Obligations, for roughly 30 days of onshore stored fuel and90 daysof net oil imports required by the International Energy Agency through an agreement. This misses the point. At the turn of the century, domestic oil wells were still producing large volumes for the nation’s eight refineries to process. Because the IEA’s 90-day requirement is fornet importsand Australia was producing most of its own fuel, the nation did well by this metric. Since then, the oil riches of the Bass Strait have largely beenused up, and six refinerieshave closed. Oil from Western Australia’s North West Shelf is mostly exported to large refineries in Singapore and Malaysia, which are much closer than Australia’s east coast. Australia became dependent on imported fuel, meaning it needed much higher stocks to meet its IEA obligations. Criticisms of the current government and its predecessors over fuel reserves aren’t well grounded. The refineries and their storage tanks closed because there wasn’t enough domestic oil to process and they couldn’t compete with bigger producers overseas. Australia’s remaining refineries are only hanging on throughgovernment subsidies. Even so, it could be a smart move to further expand domestic fuel reserves, given how exposed we are to a long and increasingly unreliable supply chain. It will also take some years to shift to more secure alternatives. Diesel storage is particularly important. Australia usestwice as muchdiesel (roughly 90 million litres a day) as petrol (44 million) because long-distance trucks, mine sites and farmers all rely on this fuel. There has been an addition of 300 million litres of diesel storage in the last few years via government and industry co-funding. But doubling storage to 60 days based on current consumption, as the Coalition wants, is unlikely to be necessary. It would make no sense to spend billions building huge tanks when the goal has to be to progressively reduce how reliant we are on importing liquid fuels. Calls toreopen closed refineriesdon’t stack up, as Energy Minister Chris Bowen haspointed out. New South Wales’s Kurnell, South Australia’s Port Stanvac and Victoria’s Altona refineries have already been demolished and replaced with oil import terminals. The exception is Perth’s Kwinana refinery, which closed in 2021 and has being considered as a site to manufacture biofuels. There’s no point in expending the time and money on building new refineries if there’s no domestic crude oil to process. Australia’s proven supplies of crude oil are nowsix years awayfrom depletion. Potential new reserves such as the Taroom Trough in Queensland or WA’sDoradoare unproven. They will take a long time to confirm, would be expensive to extract, and may not produce the right type of crude oil to be converted into the most important fuel, diesel. A new refinery could import crude from overseas, but it would be competing with much larger regional refineries and we would still be reliant on overseas supplies. For these reasons – and more – expanding refinery capacity is unlikely to help. This year’s oil shock may have a long tail. The Strait of Hormuz is not open and damaged facilities will need to be repaired. It makes sense to accelerate the shift to electric transport and machinery wherever possible, rather than overbuilding fuel storage and see the tanks become stranded assets. What authorities must do is make a hard-nosed assessment of how much fuel storage we will actually need, paired with accelerated electrification targets. The great benefit of electrified transport is that the energy to run electric cars, buses, trucks and mine equipment can be made locally using renewables and storage, with backup gas plants. Every new EV cuts demand for petrol or diesel, freeing up scarce supplies for use in areas where electrification is presently harder. Electric cars are now approaching price parity with combustion engine vehicles. Electric buses and electric delivery vans are now common on city streets and the first electric prime moversare arriving. Rapid progress in battery technology means electric trucks are now viable for medium-distance routes such asSydney-Canberra. Longer routes will be harder. Here, biodiesel may have a role. Last year the federal governmentannounceda $1.1 billion plan for low-carbon liquid fuels such as biodiesel, made from fats such as tallow, vegetable oils or even algae. These alternative fuels havelong struggledwith scale and cost. But they may be worthwhile if it means long-distance trucks are able to run on locally-made, low-emissions fuel. For example, Indonesia isabout to shiftto a 50/50 mix of biodiesel and fossil diesel. A new efficiency scheme for commercial and heavy transport could drive the change, as the New Vehicle Efficiency Scheme is doing for cars and light commercial vehicles. So, there’s the plan: