Category Archives: Offshore

The windfarm will have up to 64 turbines and will be capable of powering 325,000 homes. Photograph: Peter Byrne/PA

A 2bn offshore windfarm in Scotland looks set to go ahead after the RSPB lost a long-running legal challenge against the plans, which the conservationists said threatened puffins, gannets and kittiwakes.

The Scottish government gave its consent to four major windfarms in the Firth of Forth and the Firth of Tay in 2014, but the RSPB launched a judicial review, saying it was extremely concerned at the impact on seabirds.

The charity won an initial court victory against Scottish ministers but a judge overturned that decision in May, clearing the development and prompting the RSPB to seek an appeal in the UKs supreme court.

On Wednesday, the court of session ruled it was refusing the application for the case to be sent to the supreme court.

Mainstream Renewable Power said it now looked forward to starting construction next year on the Neart na Gaoithe windfarm, north of Torness on Scotlands east coast, which will be capable of powering 325,000 homes.

Andy Kinsella, the companys chief operating officer, said: After more than two years and two court hearings, we hope that the RSPB acknowledges a fair hearing and allows us to get on with delivering the very significant benefits this project brings to the Scottish economy and its environment.

The firm said it was confident it could build the windfarm without harming wildlife and said the rise of more powerful turbines meant it had reduced their number from 125 in the original planning application to a maximum of 64.

Mainstream Renewable Power has secured a subsidy contract for its windfarm but the other three, backed by different developers, would need to win subsidy deals to go ahead. The Scottish government has estimated the four projects would generate up to 1.2bn for the countrys economy.

Anne McCall, director of RSPB Scotland, said: While disappointed by the court of session decision it is not wholly unexpected. We will now take time to consider the details and determine our next steps.

The existing consents, if implemented, could have a significant impact on Scotlands breeding seabirds but we are hopeful that by continuing to work with all the developers we will be able to reduce those impacts.

Read the rest here:

RSPB loses legal fight against 2bn offshore windfarm in Scotland - The Guardian

Although the United States dropped its international pledge to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, states on the eastern seaboardof the country are moving ahead with long-term commitments to offshore wind power.

States that want to boost their renewable energy supplies are often the same ones that have pledged continued support for the Paris climate agreement, despite President Donald Trumps decision to leave it. Many of these states see their chance with offshore wind technology, despite the current high costand logistical complications.

Offshore wind supporters New York, Rhode Island and Virginiaare among the nine states that want the United States to continue to meet climate goals under the Paris agreement. Other states with advanced plans for offshore wind include Massachusetts, New Jersey and Maryland. Cities and counties in those states, including Baltimore and Boston, have also joined the Paris climate pledge.

While these states are committed to expanding their renewable energy portfolios, many face obstacles, such as lack of space for onshore wind and solar farms or hydropower facilities. An alternative, transportingenergy from wind farms in northern Maine, upstate New York or Canada, can be too complicated or difficult to manage due to the long distance and overland transmission lines, clean energy advocates say.

That leaves offshore wind, a costly technologythat has bedeviled U.S. developers; among the 12 offshore wind leases issued by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management for federal waters, none are close to construction, according to BOEM. And turbine construction in state waters is only happening for smaller-scale projects.

The only working project is a smallfive-turbineoperation generating 30 megawatts in Rhode Island state waters, owned by Deepwater Wind.

But states along the eastern coast have a unique geographic advantage:North Atlantic waters receive the strongest winds on the East Coast, according to BOEM.

To encourage more offshore wind development, states such as Massachusetts and New York are focusing on infrastructure including ports and underwater transmission lines that would make offshore wind construction easier and more cost-effective.

For example, Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker (R) last summer committed to including offshore wind in the state energy portfolio by 2027. The state plans to receive proposals in December for an offshore wind project off the coast of Marthas Vineyard.

Massachusetts willinvest in offshore wind in a way that stabilizes the cost of energy for the Commonwealths ratepayers and helps achieve our aggressive greenhouse gas emissions reductions goals, Katie Gronendyke, spokeswoman for the states Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs, said in an email last week.

Part of the problem is not just wind or underwater transmission technology but getting the bases for the wind turbines out into the open sea, Sonia Aggarwal, vice president of the policy group Energy Innovation, said in an interview last week.

To help with the logistical challenges, Massachusetts also set up a first-of-its-kind marine commerce terminal in the New Bedford port, operated by theMassachusetts Clean Energy Center, aneconomic development agency.

The infrastructure will attract development, but Massachusetts is still far away from putting steel in water, Stephen Pike, chief executive of MassCEC, saidin an interview last week.

New York also wants toinclude offshore wind energy in its portfolio by 2030, and Maryland and New Jersey are planning to invest in manufacturing and infrastructure maintenance to help attract offshore wind business.

Developers seeking to take advantage of the renewed state interest are focusing on one of two approaches in order to overcome the logistical challenges: building incrementally larger projects closer to shore in state waters, following the pattern of Deepwater Wind, the countrys leading offshore developer; or testing a small project to clear the way for an industrial-sized project in federal waters, as Dominion Energy Inc. plans to do.

Deepwater Wind also plans to submit a proposal for the Massachusetts project off of Marthas Vineyard, the companys Massachusetts vice president, Matthew Morrissey said last week, before proceeding with plans to develop its two federal leases.

Dominion Energy, working with DONG Energy,an experienced European offshore wind development company, plans to buildtwo 6-megawatt turbines off Virginia Beach in a state-owned lease, then expand to more than 300 wind turbines to generate up to 2,000 megawatts of energy in surrounding federal waters.

We are confident that this project can proceed without undue logistical hurdles, Lauren Burm, a spokeswoman at DONG Energy, said in an email last week.

Correction: A previous version of this story misidentified which states have advanced plans for offshore wind projects.

Read more here:

East Coast States Take Lead in Offshore Wind After Paris Accord - Morning Consult

An international organization dedicated to restoring the worlds oceans is asking Greenville residents to form an advocacy group to protest seismic testing and oil drilling in the Atlantic.

Randy Sturgill, senior campaign manager with Oceana spoke to more than 20 people who attended a meeting organized by the Cypress Group of the N.C. Sierra Club, which has members from 19 eastern North Carolina counties.

This is a Trojan horse, Sturgill said. I brought you here under the pretext of an oil exploration meeting but what Im really asking for is a call to action.

Oceana and other environmental groups are redoubling efforts to fight oil and natural gas development off the United States Atlantic border, and community advocacy groups are necessary, he said.

Sturgill said advocacy groups are needed to re-engage because President Donald Trump signed an exclusive order in April allowing energy companies to move forward with seismic testing off the United States coast.

The surveys are used to map potential drilling sites for oil and natural gas. Sturgill said the order overturned former President Barack Obamas 2016 decision to restrict testing and drilling.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration fisheries service is accepting public comments until Friday on proposals to allow companies to incidentally, but not intentionally, harass marine mammals, during the testing process.

Environmentalists have been waiting for Gov. Roy Cooper to address the testing issue. Coopers office announced late Wednesday that he is scheduled to make a statement on offshore drilling this morning at Fort Macon State Park Education and Visitors Centers.

Congressional leaders are responsive to a constituents, and working together individuals can change the tide of policy, Sturgill said.

However, several teenagers representing Greenville-based Save A Sea Turtle said its difficult to know if leaders are hearing their message.

The teens recently met with a representative of U.S. Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., to protest future seismic testing off North Carolinas coast because of its detrimental effect on turtles and other migrating fish and mammals off the coast. They said at Tuesdays meeting that Tillis representative said off-shore drilling is necessary to ensure American energy independence and quickly ended the discussion.

Sturgill spoke at length about how residents of Kure Beach convinced their town board to reject a letter sent by the then-mayor to Washington D.C. supporting drilling in the Atlantic. He did so within consent from the board or community discussion.

When the federal Bureau of Ocean Energy Management wanted to hold only a single public hearing in Wilmington about plans for developing the Atlantics energy resources, citizen protesters, combined with U.S. Rep. Walter Jones appeals, forced two public hearings, one in Wilmington and one in the Outer Banks.Sturgill said 300 turned out for the Wilmington meeting and about 670 for the Outer Banks event. The groups overwhelmingly opposed development.

Strugill said continuous public opposition played an important role in Obamas decision against explorations.Oil companies are now jockeying to begin seismic testing, also called seismic airgun testing.

The testing involves ships towing multiple seismic devices through the water, discharging them at 10- to 12-second increments. The bouncing sounds, which can be heard up to 2,500 miles away, can supply information on possible oil and gas deposits.

With Trumps new order, an area extending from mid-Florida to New Jersey will be tested, Sturgill said.

Advocates have sought to have a neutral party conduct the testing and share the data with interested oil companies, but the recommendation has been ignored so each interested company can conduct its own research.

The Department of Interior estimates more than 130,000 secure creatures could be harmed by the seismic noise. The testing will drive fish deeper and force fish and mammals off their normal migration routes.

Seismic testing also has questionable accuracy, Sturgill said, with data showing it produces a 40 percent chance of finding oil or gas.

Less disruptive technology is being developed, he said, but the process is slow. Sturgill said environmental advocates would like testing to be delayed until the new technology is ready.

Sturgill said his organization wants to engage more inland advocacy groups to show elected officials and energy development supporters that all North Carolinians want to protect coastal resources.

While no one volunteered to lead the new advocacy group, many attending the event did sign up to receive future information.

David Ames, co-chairman of the Cypress Group of N.C. Sierra Club, said hes unsure if another local advocacy group is needed but looks forward to working with Oceana.

We are interested in offshore drilling, so we thought this would be a natural group to collaborate with, Ames said. The Cypress Group and the entire North Carolina Sierra Club is very much opposed to offshore drilling. Our whole emphasis is getting away from fossil fuels and moving to clean energy.

Contact Ginger Livingston at glivingston@reflector.comor 252-329-9570. Follow her on Twitter @GingerLGDR.

Go here to see the original:

Group fighting offshore oil exploration - Greenville Daily Reflector

By Mike Ludwig

As the Trump administration moves to gut Obama-era clean water protections nationwide, an environmental group is warning the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that its draft pollution discharge permit for offshore drilling platforms in the Gulf of Mexico violates clean water laws because it allows operators to dump fracking chemicals and large volumes of drilling wastewater directly into the Gulf.

In a recent letter to the agency, the Center for Biological Diversity told the EPA that the dumping of drilling wastewaterwhich can contain fracking chemicals, drilling fluids and pollutants, such as heavy metalsdirectly into Gulf waters is unacceptable and prohibited under the Clean Water Act.

Under current rules established by the Obama administration, offshore oil and gas platforms can discharge well-treatment chemicals and unlimited amounts of "produced waters" from undersea wells directly into the Gulf as long as operators perform toxicity tests a few times a year and monitor for "sheens" on the water's surface. About 75 billion gallons of produced water were dumped in the Gulf in 2014 alone, according to EPA records.

Offshore fracking, which typically involves injecting water and chemicals at high pressure into undersea wells to improve the flow of oil and gas, has rapidly expanded in the Gulf of Mexico over the past decade. The latest draft of the pollution discharge permit, which was largely prepared under the Obama administration, would require drillers to collect information on the fracking chemicals they dump overboard. Regulators want to know what these chemicals are; their catalogue of offshore fracking chemicals has not been updated since 2001, despite advancements in technology.

"It's absolutely appalling that EPA is letting oil companies dump fracking wastewater into the Gulf without any idea of the types of chemicals being discharged, or their effects on sea turtles, sturgeon or the other marine life that call Gulf waters home," said Kristen Monsell, an attorney for the Center for Biological Diversity, in an email to Truthout.

The Center for Biological Diversity, is also fighting offshore fracking off the coast of California, where a federal court on Friday rejected the Trump administration's effort to dismiss legal challenges to fracking in the Santa Barbara Channel. The Center for Biological Diversity, along with other environmental groups and the state of California, argue in separate lawsuits that federal regulators did not do enough to study and mitigate the environmental impacts of offshore fracking before allowing operators to use the technology in Pacific waters.

The Center for Biological Diversity may have trouble convincing the EPA to change the draft pollution discharge permit for the Gulf of Mexico without taking the agency to court. Under the leadership of Scott Pruitt, a Trump-appointee with close ties to polluting industries, the EPA is working to gut environmental regulations with the explicit intent of maximizing fossil fuel production.

Republicans Put Clean Water Rule in the Crosshairs

Pruitt is currently working to repeal the Clean Water Rule, an Obama-era regulation expanding the number of tributaries and wetlands located upstream from major bodies of water that are protected by the Clean Water Act. According to the Obama-era EPA, drinking water for one-third of the country's population originates from such sources. However, farmers, agribusinesses and developers fear the rule would expand federal oversight to small bodies of water and interfere with private property rights. A federal court has blocked implementation of the rule until legal questions are resolved.

In late June, Pruitt released a proposal for rescinding the Clean Water Rule, which would leave federal regulators with the same definition of protected waters that has been in place since the late 1980s. It's the first step in a lengthy process that is required by law to include a scientific review and public input. However, Republicans in Congress are working to waive these requirements.

Last week, the House Appropriations Committee, lead by Idaho Republican Rep. Mike Simpson, approved an energy and water appropriations bill containing a rider that would waive the federal administrative requirements for rescinding the Clean Water Rule. The bill would also cut funding for energy efficiency initiatives while investing in nuclear energy and weapons programs.

If passed in its current form, the legislation would allow Pruitt to rescind the rule without responding to public comments or justifying the rulemaking with an extensive record of scientific facts. The legislation could also make it much more difficult for environmental groups to challenge Pruitt's legal rationale for rescinding the rule in court.

"The Trump administration's proposal to allow more pollution into America's drinking water sources is senseless," said John Rumpler, a senior attorney and clean water director at Environment America, in a statement. "For Congress to exempt such a move from the law is simply beyond the pale."

Water Pollution and the Gulf of Mexico

Under the Clean Water Act, polluters must receive a permit from the EPA or state regulators before discharging pollutants into a body of water under federal jurisdiction. If the Clean Water Rule were to somehow survive the Trump administration, it would extend these requirements further upstream in many parts of the country's interior.

In the Gulf of Mexico, which hosts the nation's highest concentration of offshore drilling platforms, one general water pollution permit is issued every five years or so for the entire industry. It's a draft of this permit that is currently under fire from environmentalists because it would allow the dumping of fracking chemicals and "produced water" from oil and gas wells.

Offshore fracking has been used to maximize production in more than 1,000 Gulf wells. Over the past eight years, the Obama administration approved hundreds of frack jobs without taking a close look at the technology's impacts on the environment, at least until recently. Offshore fracking is typically much smaller in scale than its controversial onshore cousin, but recent investigations into the practice drew public attention to the industry's habit of dumping billions of gallons of drilling wastewater into the ocean every year.

A review of the draft water pollution permit for oil and gas operations in the Gulf reveals how difficult it can be to uphold federal clean water standards in remote areasor in this case, out on the open sea. Oil and gas operators are allowed to dump an unlimited amount of wastewater overboard, but certain conditions must be met in order to keep water quality near drilling platforms within federal standards.

Under the draft permit, offshore drillers would be required to run toxicity tests of the produced water and other fluids dumped overboard twice a year. If the fluid fails to pass the test, it would be considered a permit violation, and operators must conduct monthly tests until the situation improves. Operators would also be required to look for "sheens" on the surface of the water and figure out what is causing them.

In addition, they would either need to collect information on any fracking chemicals they dump overboard and share it with regulators, or participate in an "industry-wide study" on offshore fracking. Regulators would then use this data to determine whether limits for those chemicals will be needed in the future.

The draft permit tightens several monitoring requirements, but Monsell says it does not go far enough to protect water quality. Plus, the monitoring would largely be conducted by the industry itself, out on the open water.

"The Trump administration can't just let the oil industry self-regulate, or we're all in huge trouble," Monsell said. "And the toxicity testing doesn't prevent the chemicals from being dumped in the first place, and the testing requirement doesn't even coincide with the dumping of fracking chemicals."

Monsell added that toxicity testing is not required at the source of the wastewater, but at the edge of a 100-meter "mixing zone" where the discharge mingles with ocean waters below the platform. This is a major concern because there are thousands of platforms operating in the Gulf, and the EPA has "no clue" about the cumulative impact of various "mixing zones" because officials have yet to completely study the issue. She argues that the EPA must seek to understand the impacts of fracking chemicals and other pollutants before allowing discharges, not after the fact.

Monsell and the Center for Biological Diversity, sent a letter of concern to the EPA last week as a public comment period on the draft permit came to a close. A spokesman for the EPA's regional office in Houston told Truthout in an email that officials would consider all the comments they have received as they work to finalize the permit.

Reposted with permission from our media associate Truthout.

Read the original:

Will the Gulf of Mexico Remain a Dumping Ground for Offshore ... - EcoWatch

A boat carrying asylum seekers to Australia. Despite revelations of physical violence, both of Australias offshore processing centres remain operational. Photograph: Rossbach/Krepp/EPA

Four years since the then prime minister, Kevin Rudd, announced that any asylum seeker who arrives in Australia by boat will have no chance of being settled in Australia, offshore detention has cost Australian taxpayers almost $5bn and the future of those held on Nauru and Manus Island remains critically uncertain.

On 19 July 2013, Rudd announced all boat-borne asylum seekers would be subject to indefinite detention offshore and would never be eligible to settle in Australia.

Despite consistent revelations of physical violence including murder sexual abuse of women and children, allegations of torture by guards, medical neglect leading to death and catastrophic rates of mental health damage, self-harm and suicide attempts, both of Australias offshore processing centres remain operational.

Roughly 2,000 people remain on Australias offshore processing islands of Nauru and Manus, and figures released under Senate estimates questioning show that the two camps have cost $4.895bn to build and run.

All of the costs are borne by Australia, which maintains effective control over both centres.

The Manus centre ruled illegal by Papua New Guineas supreme court 15 months ago will close on 31 October under pressure from the PNG government and from the private contractors running the centre, who have refused to continue working there.

The Nauru camp will continue to run but that countrys government has consistently refused to offer permanent resettlement to refugees, instead offering 20-year visas with restrictions on travel.

The proposed resolution for Australias offshore refugee population, the US deal to resettle refugees from Australias Nauru and Manus operations in America, has foundered, with the US hitting its 50,000 cap for refugee resettlement this year and officials abruptly leaving their on-island interviews on Nauru two weeks early.

No one held under Australias offshore regime has been resettled under the US program.

Both the US and Australian governments have said the deal remains on track but details of the agreement are unknown.

No one held under Australias offshore regime has been resettled under the US program and the deal does not commit the US to taking a single refugee if it deems they have not passed extreme vetting, a threshold that has never been defined.

Australian officials have conceded that, even if the US resettlement program does go ahead, it will not clear the detention centres, leaving a balance on the two islands.

The Manus detention centre is being progressively shut down with more than 800 men still housed there. Buildings have been closed off, power shut off, activities stopped and people forcibly moved from their dormitories. There are reports there is no more running water in parts of the camp and those within are reliant on bottled water.

Despite the camp closing around them, many of those in the detention centre are refusing to leave, saying they will not be safe in the community.

The PNG prime minister, Peter ONeill, said the American deal remained a viable solution to close the camp but said his government was looking at all options for the men in the camp.

The Human Rights Law Centres Daniel Webb said offshore detention had run four years too many.

In a series of interviews with Webb and with Iranian journalist and Manus detainee Behrouz Boochani, men in detention have said they faced uncertain futures.

I feel like everything the Australian government is doing is designed to force us to go home or go into PNG. They are squeezing us out of the camp but not to the airport where they will take us to safety. They are squeezing us into the PNG community where we are not safe. Amir, 23, Iran

The situation here is getting worse and worse. They have shut down classrooms. Closed the gym. They tell us every day that we cant stay here. They say go back to your country or go to the transit centre. But we arent safe out there in the community. That is the worst thing they are trying to push us somewhere where we will not be safe. Madu, 23, stateless Rohingya

Weve had so many hard times. Weve been attacked, weve been punched and weve been fired at with shotguns. My friend, Reza, was killed. He was a gentle man. But they didnt care who we were. Farhard, 36, stateless Kurd

Webb said the US deal initially gave those on those islands some hope that finally our government was conceding it couldnt just abandon them there forever.

But its now eight months since the deal was announced and not a single refugee has been resettled, he said. Most of the men on Manus havent even had an initial interview.

The bottom line is that no one is likely to go to the US anytime soon and many now seem unlikely to ever go at all. Two-thousand lives remain on a painful pause with no end in sight. One hundred and sixty-nine childhoods are being spent surrounded by suffering and despair.

After four years, enough is well and truly enough.

The foreign affairs minister, Julie Bishop, said on the weekend the US deal was progressing as we expected, saying there had not been any delay.

The United States is upholding the agreement, she said.

Ian Rintoul from the Refugee Action Coalition said the US deal had stalled and those held on Australias offshore islands had been living on false hopes for eight months already.

Now those hopes have been dashed again, he said. It is time for the Turnbull government to end the pretence of the US deal and act immediately to bring them all the asylum seekers and refugees to Australia.

Paul Ronald, the chief executive of Save the Children, the child welfare agency that formerly worked on Nauru, said that, even if the US deal remained a possibility, the current situations on Nauru and Manus were untenable.

Most of the men on Manus havent even had an initial interview.

The Australian government is undeniably responsible for the health and welfare of those who it has transferred offshore, he said. Refugees on Nauru and Manus Island can no longer remain in limbo. Prime minister Turnbull should immediately bring them to safety in Australia while they await resettlement in the US or until another safe and sustainable alternative can be secured.

Last month, the Australian government agreed to pay $70m in compensation to the Manus Island detainees, who sought damages in the Victorian supreme court for illegally detaining them in dangerous and harmful conditions.

In agreeing to the record payout, the government did not concede liability.

There is a hastened effort under way to get the payout money to the 1905 men enjoined to the class action before Manus is closed, because it may be difficult to find them after that time.

The Manus and Nauru processing centres were re-opened in 2012 under the Gillard government, but July 13 marks the date of the policy shift - under Rudd - prohibiting any asylum seeker who arrived by boat from ever resettling in Australia.

Vigils will be held across the country to mark four years since the alteration to Australian policy.

Originally posted here:

Offshore detention cost taxpayers $5bn in four years and asylum seekers remain in limbo - The Guardian

Crude oil futures prices are higher today (up about a half percent at 1 p.m. EDT) on reports that Saudi Arabia is considering cutting its oil exports by an additional one million barrels a day, starting with a 600,000 bbl. per day cut (bpd) in August.

The rumor, reported by Reuters, comes as the latest OPEC production cut compliance estimate fell to 78% from its prior 100%-plus. At the same time, Ecuador announced it would stopcomplying with the OPEC production agreement because it needed the revenue from the extra oil. While Ecuador was only curtailing 25,000 bpd, a smallvolume, its announcement showcases the pressure many small OPEC members are under since oil prices have failed to rally to levels anticipated at the time the production agreement was reached at the end of 2016.

Higher oil prices are critical for the future of the oil business, but no one is sure exactly how high they need to rise in order to restore activity. The latest figures show that oil production from large offshore fields has not declined as quickly as forecast, rewarding their owners with more cash than was budgeted. While oil prices may not rise to levels anticipated earlier this year, the industry should take heart in BP CEO Robert Dudleys comment at the World Petroleum Congress that prices arent lower forever. Like a good forecaster, Dudley wasnt specific about a timetable.

Offshore producers are continuing to do the easy things to sustain or increase production. Recently, infield drilling and maintenance work have been the lifeblood of offshore work. Importantly, there are signs of a slight uptick in drilling contract awards, although the competition for them has kept contract day rates depressed. This isnt discouraging, since this is the normal condition for the business when it is bouncing along the bottom of a cycle and just beginning its recovery phase.

What happens in this recovery phase is that the low day rates and the short-term nature of contracts (producers at this stage often only contract a rig for one well plus an option) puts significant pressure on service companies to use their limited cash reserves extremely judiciously since no one knows just how long this phase will last. That means the funds required to keep vessels and rigs in regulatory and insurance compliance (or return them to) isnt available for many companies.

Although this limitation may be temporary, it is the key phase the industry must transit as the business seesan acceleration in offshore day rates. He who has the cash will suddenly become king. However, if he misspends it, he will quickly return to pauper status once again.

See the rest here:

Offshore pessimism may point to recovery - WorkBoat (blog)

New Delhi, Jul 19 () India-focused offshore funds and exchange-traded funds (ETFs) have pumped in nearly USD 5 billion in the first six months of the year due to country's long-term growth prospect, says a Morningstar report.

In comparison, these funds pulled out USD 2.25 billion in January-June period of 2016.

The funds are looking at India from a long-term perspective as indicated by numbers. However, this trend may reverse going forward if the expectation of the managers on the economic growth front are not met, Himanshu Srivastava, Senior Analyst Manager Research at Morningstar India, said.

According to the report, India-focused offshore funds invested USD 3.8 billion in the first six months of the current year, while that of ETFs witnessed an infusion of USD 983 million, taking the total to USD 4.8 billion.

Notably, half of the overall flow came in the months of March and April.

On a positive note, the money largely came into offshore funds which signify long-term money as against offshore ETF, where the money is largely short-term.

An offshore India fund is one that is not domiciled in the country but invests primarily in its markets.

The report noted that portfolio of India focused offshore funds and ETF shows an affinity towards those areas which stands to benefit from the fall in interest rates, turn around in economic cycle and uptick in urban consumption demand.

"Financial services, consumer cyclical particularly auto and its ancillary and basic material sectors such as cement and metals are the top sectors, wherein such funds are investing," Srivastava added.

Read the original here:

Offshore India funds, ETFs invest $5 bn in H1 2017 - Times of India

The popular television host has been eating his way through San Diego as he shoots an episode of his upcoming new series The Zimmern List for the Travel Channel. Yesterday, Zimmern spent an epic six hours filming in Barrio Logan with Street Gourmet LAs Bill Esparza, where they hung out with the local lowrider community at Salud Tacos and ate at the Tacos Barrios pop-up before dining at Ironside Fish & Oyster in Little Italy.

This morning, Zimmern paid a visit to seafood wholesaler Catalina Offshore Products, where he graded bigeye tuna with Catalinas Dave Rudie and Tommy Gomes. From there, he braved the crowds at Menya Ultra Ramen for a bowl of tonkotsu ramen with freshly-made noodles (see Eaters video of Menyas noodle-making process here). Zimmern, who lives in Minnesota, told Eater that hes seen San Diegos culinary scene improve immensely since his first visit here 24 years ago, saying that he often makes pit stops here before traveling on to Asia. Hes especially fond of local Filipino eateries, which he explored during the filming the San Diego-centric episode of Bizarre Foods with Andrew Zimmern back in 2012.

Zimmern also hit up Pokirrito and RakiRaki Ramen while in Kearny Mesa and is expected to return to Little Italy later today to catch up with his good buddy Richard Blais and check out Blais Juniper & Ivy and The Crack Shack.

Link:

Andrew Zimmern Spotted at Menya Ramen, Catalina Offshore and More - Eater San Diego

Houston Business Journal

Offshore energy company emerges from bankruptcy, eliminating $2.3B of debt Houston Business Journal Paragon Offshore Ltd. announced July 18 it has emerged from bankruptcy after completing a restructuring that eliminated $2.3 billion of debt. The successor company to Paragon Offshore PLC (OTC: PGNPQ), which filed for bankruptcy in February 2016 with ... Paragon Offshore Completes Restructuring Plan and Emerges From Chapter 11GlobeNewswire (press release) all 3 news articles »

Read the original post:

Offshore energy company emerges from bankruptcy, eliminating $2.3B of debt - Houston Business Journal

Sign made for Brunswick County Commissioner Pat Sykes at rally against offshore drilling (Photo: Hannah Patrick/WWAY)

BRUNSWICK COUNTY, NC (WWAY) Dozens rallied in Sunset Beach today against offshore drilling, seismic testing, and GenX.

Brunswick County is one of only two counties in the state that has passed resolutions supporting offshore drilling.

Representative Deb Butler was one of several guest speakers who addressed a very large crowd at Sunday Beach Town Park this morning about offshore drilling.

When big oil threatens to blast the floor of our ocean, Butler said. We are going to stand again together and say no.

Butler also addressed GenX concerns.

As DuPont and Chemours are filling the Cape Fear River with GenX, what do we say? No, Butler said.

Franklin Oldham said he drove to the rally from Wilmington to make sure his voice was heard.

The GenX scare, seismic blasting, offshore drilling, these are things that affect everybody, Oldham said.

Sunset Beach Councilman Rich Cerrato said offshore drilling is an economic risk.

One spill in any Brunswick County pristine beach will destroy this county and economy, Cerrato said. People will not visit. We will lose revenues. I do not understand why our county commissioners in Brunswick County do not understand this business logic.

Cerrato told the crowd Brunswick County is one of only two counties that has previously passed resolutions supporting offshore drilling.

This is embarrassing, Cerrato said.

Dwight Willis shared that frustration by reading a statement to the crowd from Brunswick County Commissioner Pat Sykes in a StarNews article over the weekend.

It might not even happen here, Sykes said in an article in the StarNews. I just dont see causing a stir when theres nothing there. I just am not one to get involved unless I need to. Its not an issue for the county at this point.

Willis then encouraged the crowd to e-mail Sykes with this message.

Stir it Pat! Willis said.

Cerrato hopes the county commissioners can come together with a new resolution.

Dont kick the can down the road, Cerrato said. Pass a resolution and vote against offshore drilling.

Butler said it needs to happen before it gets to the state.

Im sure its going to work its way to the state house, Butler said. Im not optimistic when it gets there. Thats why I think we need to combat it on the local level.

We reached out to Commissioner Sykes for a response. We are still waiting to hear back.

Original post:

Dozens rally against offshore drilling, call on new county resolution - WWAY NewsChannel 3