Kurt Abraham, Editor-in-Chief
Fig. 1. The Event Complex Aberdeen (TECA), better know to some as P&J Live, site of Offshore Europe. Image: TECA.
Well, a few days have gone by, and SPE Offshore Europe (OE) in Aberdeen (Fig. 1) is now a collection of memories. But, what to make of what was seen and heard during the four-day conference and exhibition? There were many different viewpoints, and, honestly, many contradictions and hypocrisies.
First, a word about the show, itself. When last held in 2023, OE attracted approximately 30,000 attendees, and there were great hopes that this figure would be exceeded this year, to perhaps as much as 35,000. Instead, there was great disappointment when event organizer Reed Exhibitions announced on late Friday, after the show ended, that attendance was only 25,000. That’s not only a failure to grow the show, it’s also a 17% reduction from two years ago, when OE was held for the first time since the Covid pandemic. It’s also a far cry from the record OE attendance of 63,000 in 2013.
SPE officials seemed to be doing their best to put a positive spin on this year’s OE, but the sad truth is that the decrease in foot traffic has to be disappointing and of great concern. Accordingly, it is no surprise that SPE has announced that OE in 2027 will be reduced to a three-day event from this year’s four-day format. In contrast, recent word out of Stavanger is that OE’s alternating counterpart, ONS (Offshore Northern Seas), is already nearing a sell-out of exhibition space and is expecting 60,000 to 70,000 attendees. So, what is making the difference? Read further down for what this editor thinks could be a key difference.
Show floor impressions. Meanwhile, OE, itself, was well-executed, and the more-than-400 exhibiting companies did a great job in representing their various specialties and product offerings. From this editor’s perspective, it seemed like offshore wind was a bit muted from its prominence in 2023. In contrast, there seemed to be a somewhat greater emphasis on traditional oil and gas technology, along with tie-ins to CCS and Net Zero operations. This, no doubt, was a welcome aspect to local and regional officials, who appear to be dismayed by the national government’s attitudes on energy and the North Sea in particular. Conference proceedings attended by this editor were largely informative and covered a good cross-section of current upstream technology issues.
Political impact. Underlying everything that went on at OE was the political situation in the UK with regard to energy. One just can’t avoid it creeping into most conversations among industry professionals. The situation basically boils down to a national administration that seems quite hostile to oil and gas, particularly to upstream operations in the UK North Sea. The administration of Prime Minister Kier Starmer continues to retain the surcharge levy on North Sea oil and gas production, even when many other countries have eliminated similar taxation. One can only assume that Starmer’s people are desperate for the revenue to prop up the national budget. But they are killing off the former golden goose for short-term gain.
Fig. 2. Conservative Party Leader Kemi Badenoch. Image: Official portrait.
In addition, the Starmer administration continues to implement a ban on granting new exploration licenses. So, operators have no opportunity to drill exploration wells from new tracts, where they might strike a few moderate discoveries. And let us not forget the fairly stringent operating rules for existing production. Taken in total, the UK’s North Sea regulatory environment is an extreme disincentive to additional investment. The regularly body for the region is the North Sea Transition Authority (NSTA). Perhaps they should change the name to NTDA, for North Sea Death Authority, because that’s where they’re headed.
Recognizing this reality, it’s no wonder that Conservative Party Leader Kemi Badenoch (Fig. 2) entered the OE plenary on Sept. 2 with her hair on fire, figuratively speaking. She built her case for greater North Sea development (and not less) by noting that “oil and gas still account for three-quarters of UK energy needs.” Furthermore, said Badenoch, Norway had its biggest discovery in 10 years, “while we are leaving our resources untouched. We are sabotaging ourselves and had the lowest oil production in [nearly 50 years]. We’ve got to get that oil and gas out of the ground.”
And that, folks, illustrates the main difference between the Labour government and the Conservative opposition. One wants to inhibit development in favor of endless windmills, while the other favors using more of the proven oil and gas technology to satisfy Britain’s energy needs. This also circles back to the lament earlier mentioned—that OE attendance was not only up, it was down noticeably. And I would dare say that much of that decline can be traced to the current Starmer regime’s energy policy.
By contrast, the outlook for next year’s ONS show in Stavanger is bright, because the government in Oslo is smart enough to pursue a dual-track energy strategy—keep oil and gas development strong while also building up alternative energies. In other words, an “all of the above” policy. What a difference between Oslo and London. Meanwhile, the folks in Aberdeen are suffering economically.
