Drilling for energy in a carbon-constrained world: an interview with Noh-il

The transition to a lower-carbon future presents a difficult challenge of meeting the world's energy needs while reducing environmental impacts. Although renewable energy is rapidly expanding, oil and natural gas continue to supply much of the world's energy, making the sustainability of these industries an increasingly important question. In this interview, POSCO International's drilling engineer Noh-il offered insights to gas field development, environmental regulations, and emerging efforts such as CCS.

Could you start by telling us about the work you’re currently doing at POSCO International?

I currently work as a drilling engineer. My responsibilities include well design and on-site supervision. Whenever there’s a project, I design the well to ensure it can be drilled safely and cost-effectively to reach the target formation. During field operations, I verify that the work is proceeding according to our design. That’s what a drilling engineer does.

Could you briefly explain the stages involved in drilling a single gas well (such as exploration, design, drilling, and completion)?

The process begins with exploration. Geologists send seismic waves into the ground or seabed and analyze how the waves bounce back to identify underground structures that may contain oil or gas. Once a promising site is identified, the drilling team conducts exploratory drilling. However, finding oil or gas is never guaranteed—the success rate is typically only around 10–20%.

If exploration confirms the presence of commercially viable reserves, the company conducts well tests to estimate how much can be produced and evaluates whether development is economically feasible. If the project moves forward, contracts are negotiated, development plans are established, and production facilities are built.

The drilling team then drills production wells and installs the equipment needed to safely control and extract the resources, a stage known as completion. After that, pipelines and transportation infrastructure are installed so the gas or oil can be delivered to customers and sold.

It seems like a lot of electricity and fuel would be consumed during this process—are there any efforts being made on-site these days to improve energy efficiency?

The government actually imposes stricter regulations in this area. While it might be a stretch to call it outright destruction of the country’s environment, since these operations do have an impact on the environment, the government mandates that we reduce emissions. 

For example, during the drilling process—which we can’t avoid—there’s something called cuttings. Well, those cuttings are slightly coated with oil. However, when dumping these soil fragments into the sea, the government imposes strict regulations—such as limiting the amount of oil they can contain—so while companies naturally pursue profit and have various founding purposes, their top priority is profit. Therefore, if protecting the environment involves additional costs, they tend to be a bit reluctant to participate in activities that protect the environment if they involve financial costs. In such cases, the government steps in to enforce regulations, essentially saying, “We have these environmental regulations in place, so you must conduct your operations in accordance with them.”

So, based on what I’ve seen so far in the field, there’s really no way around it. This phenomenon is ongoing, and reducing energy consumption—or taking similar measures—is directly tied to financial considerations, such as extending the operational lifespan by reducing energy use. Therefore, rather than the company itself setting a major new direction or making significant efforts in this area, our approach is to comply with national regulations and do our part to protect the environment. 

So if you ask what specific measures we’re taking—at the very least, when looking solely at drilling operations—as I mentioned earlier, the drilling cuttings and soil debris are referred to, in more technical terms, as “cuttings.” We limit the percentage of oil contained in those cuttings. And when it comes to environmentally friendly materials, for example, when we operate machinery or production equipment, the equipment runs on a hydraulic system. There are pipes—called hydraulic lines—and inside these lines is hydraulic fluid. The fluid pushes through valves and other components, but after it’s used, it’s simply dumped directly into the ocean. This is because the ocean is so vast; even if a small amount of oil is spilled, the ocean’s self-purification process means it’s generally not a problem at this level. However, since that’s not ideal, there will likely be efforts to replace the hydraulic fluid with an eco-friendly alternative. 

Additionally, to be specific, after well completion, when we conduct the production test—the “well test” I mentioned earlier—we verify that gas or oil is coming out. As for the remaining gas or oil that comes out, since facilities to handle it haven’t been established yet. Since the well test is conducted during the exploration or appraisal phase—not the development phase—we don’t have the capacity to store or transport it. So we end up burning all the oil and gas that comes out. However, burning it generates all kinds of greenhouse gases and exhaust gases—such as CH₄ (methane) and CO₂ (carbon dioxide). We’re making efforts to propose measures to address these carbon emissions and other issues in a way that complies with government regulations.

So now we have an obligation to report to the government and the country on the environmental impacts of our activities. In countries with oil and gas reserves, this is known as an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), and we are required to submit an EIA report. In almost every country, it’s mandatory for us to thoroughly investigate all the environmental impacts caused by our drilling and development operations, compile that information into a report, and submit it. In this way, companies are making efforts to minimize the environmental impacts as required by the government. 

Earlier, you mentioned that if the government tightens environmental regulations, companies will respond accordingly, and I also think that’s a very important point. But if the government does tighten regulations, would companies plan to expand their current eco-friendly activities, as you just suggested?

At first glance, if the government were to tighten regulations, for example, we would naturally have to comply. But on a deeper level, if regulations continue to be tightened excessively, our costs will inevitably rise. If those rising costs end up erasing all the profits we make, then we would have no reason to continue operating here. So, I think we need to find a reasonable balance.

Does that mean the government needs to provide more support so that we can adopt more environmentally friendly methods?

Returning to the rock chip cutting example I mentioned earlier, the exact oil content is 6.9%. This is called “oil cutting” in English, and while the oil cutting rate is 6.9%, we’ve suddenly received a government directive to reduce it to 0%. But the fact is, technically, we can’t achieve 0%. And while I don’t know the exact details, the 6.9% figure was set based on research findings indicating that dumping a coating with this level of oil content—around 6.9%—into the ocean does not impact the environment. That’s why the 6.9% criterion was established. 

But now, suddenly being told to reduce it to 0%, or to reduce carbon annulation and other factors to zero during well testing—this is technically impossible. Even if it were somehow possible, if it costs us too much money, from a corporate standpoint, we’d have to say, “We can’t do that.” Since we can make arguments like this, I think the government needs to provide some reasonable, sound justification.

Apart from what you’ve mentioned so far, are there any other eco-friendly efforts your company is contributing to?

Our company has diversified its business quite extensively and is heavily involved in the CCS sector. Although this hasn’t reached the commercialization stage yet, once it does, we’ll be able to implement solutions such as injecting carbon into the empty spaces created by fracking the oil we’ve extracted. I believe we can say that by carrying out CCS projects—which benefit the environment—we can balance out the environmental impact of the energy we consume.

While diversifying our portfolio—which includes energy sources like natural gas that can be harmful to the environment—we’re also building a portfolio of initiatives, such as CCS, that help restore and preserve the environment. In this way, we can convey that the company is actively working to reduce its energy consumption and other related impacts.