I remember three years ago, same time as now. It was April, and I was looking for an internship placement. I applied with many companies, and kept receiving rejections until finally I received a call from Schlumberger that I would be doing my internship with them in drilling and measurement segment.
Although companies were doing well at that time as there was no market downturn like the one we are in right now, getting an internship was still a difficult task to do. But when I see how extremely hard it is for students to secure their internship right now, I feel that we were somehow privileged.
With oil and gas companies cutting their costs down, reducing their workforce and scaling back their recruitment activities, students are met with a tough time securing an internship placement. To succeed in obtaining an internship placement in such a market downturn requires much effort, and different strategies. To help students with this task, here are three advices that I believe could help them secure their internship this year.
1. Act outside the box
It is often said "think outside the box", well, it is April now, and definitely there is no time to think, it is time to act. Acting inside the box would be to follow the traditional way of applying for an internship. That starts with preparing your resume and cover-letter. Getting companies' contacts details ready and then start to apply online or send your resume and cover-letter to the HR. Then you wait for the magic to happen.
While acting inside the box often works well in a better state of the oil market, it is highly unlikely that it works well in the current downturn. Oil companies are trying to reduce costs by laying off some of their employees and scaling back their hiring activities. That means your online application will often be rejected or you end up getting no response from companies. And this is the reason why I want you to act outside the box and here is how you do it.
Follow the above steps of applying for an internship and once you are done, you don't really have to wait for the magic to happen. Instead, I want you to prepare yourself to visit those companies. This may sound bizarre at first, but it is exactly what I want you to do. There is no need to start thinking if companies will agree to see you or not, or if they ask you to submit online rather than going to the company's office, because there is a strong reason why you should go.
With many applications sent over to oil and gas companies everyday not only for internship, but also for job, and the fact that companies have reduced their recruitment activities, it is highly likely that your applications will not be looked at. But think about it, what if you pay them a visit, show up in their office, and hopefully you manage to meet their HR, things could go differently. Isn't it?
While it is true that the majority of oil companies have online application and you are requested to apply there, don't forget that many companies allow drop-in resume during conferences and exhibitions which is the same as what you are going to do. You are going to visit the company and drop your resume. The only difference here is that sometimes you need to have an appointment to visit the company.
For companies that are hard to visit unless you have an appointment, there are two ways to get it. First of all, find someone you know working in that company. Ask them if they can help you to visit the company. Most of the time this person will be your senior or someone you met during a conference or any oil industry related activities. Just let them know why you want to visit the company and why they have to help you. Convincing them depends on your ability and skills to convince people. So give it a try.
The second way to secure an appointment is to call the company and ask for an appointment with the HR and tell them that you are a student looking for an internship and that you have an offer for the company which you will discuss with their HR or anyone who will meet you... I've just told you to say that you have an offer for the company, so what a student has to offer a company?
2. Offer the company to do a non-paid internship
If you are serious about getting your internship with oil and gas companies in such a market downturn, you should start thinking about a non-paid internship. Many oil and gas companies used to offer paid internship to students where they get a monthly payment while doing their training, however, since oil companies now are more focused on cutting costs down, they reduced or totally closed paid internships positions.
That being said, as a student you are left with no option but to adapt to the current circumstances. Adapting here means to change your strategy from looking for a paid internship to offering companies to do a non-paid internship. This is the offer that I have mentioned earlier which can get you an appointment with the company. Therefore, when you call the company to make an appointment, let them know that you are a student and that you have an offer regarding internship which you want to discuss with their HR.
So why you have to offer the companies to do a non-paid internship. First of all, it addresses the difficult time companies are going through and that you are aware about it. Besides that, it makes you stand out among other normal applicants and consequently increases your chances of securing a placement. It also shows your eagerness to give up money for knowledge and experience. These all are qualities that companies value, and by doing so you may not only get an internship placement but you may also secure your future job.
3. Search for internship outside the oil industry
The last advice that I want to share with you on how to secure your internship for this year is to look for internship opportunities outside the oil industry. Oil companies have reduced their openings for internships, and therefore many students will be left with no chance of securing their internship placement within the oil industry. In this case, my advice for you is to look for internship opportunities outside the oil industry.
In my perspective, internship is more about gaining your first experience on how the actual workplace looks like, how employees interact with each. It is about building your interpersonal skills more than building your technical skills as the time is limited. Therefore, in a time where getting an internship placement is hard in your own industry, it is advised that you look for an internship in a different industries, preferably ones that are close to yours.
Don't waste your time waiting for a response from oil and gas companies where you have applied for internship. Look around you, find opportunities in other industries, ask your friends or family to help get a placement for your internship in positions that can give you the same workplace experience, and help you build your interpersonal skills.
Those were the three advices that I wanted to share with you which could help you secure your internship placement in the oil industry or in other industries especially as the time left to start your internship is very short. One last reminder though is; don't forget to prepare an excellent resume and cover-letter as the above tips are only meant to make your resume and cover-letter reach to the HR's hand. And lastly, I wish you all the best in your internship hunting journey.
By Alahdal A. Hussein
Something interesting to share?
Join NrgEdge and create your own NrgBuzz today
According to 2018 data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) for newly constructed utility-scale electric generators in the United States, annual capacity-weighted average construction costs for solar photovoltaic systems and onshore wind turbines have continued to decrease. Natural gas generator costs also decreased slightly in 2018.
From 2013 to 2018, costs for solar fell 50%, costs for wind fell 27%, and costs for natural gas fell 13%. Together, these three generation technologies accounted for more than 98% of total capacity added to the electricity grid in the United States in 2018. Investment in U.S. electric-generating capacity in 2018 increased by 9.3% from 2017, driven by natural gas capacity additions.
The average construction cost for solar photovoltaic generators is higher than wind and natural gas generators on a dollar-per-kilowatt basis, although the gap is narrowing as the cost of solar falls rapidly. From 2017 to 2018, the average construction cost of solar in the United States fell 21% to $1,848 per kilowatt (kW). The decrease was driven by falling costs for crystalline silicon fixed-tilt panels, which were at their lowest average construction cost of $1,767 per kW in 2018.
Crystalline silicon fixed-tilt panels—which accounted for more than one-third of the solar capacity added in the United States in 2018, at 1.7 gigawatts (GW)—had the second-highest share of solar capacity additions by technology. Crystalline silicon axis-based tracking panels had the highest share, with 2.0 GW (41% of total solar capacity additions) of added generating capacity at an average cost of $1,834 per kW.
Total U.S. wind capacity additions increased 18% from 2017 to 2018 as the average construction cost for wind turbines dropped 16% to $1,382 per kW. All wind farm size classes had lower average construction costs in 2018. The largest decreases were at wind farms with 1 megawatt (MW) to 25 MW of capacity; construction costs at these farms decreased by 22.6% to $1,790 per kW.
Compared with other generation technologies, natural gas technologies received the highest U.S. investment in 2018, accounting for 46% of total capacity additions for all energy sources. Growth in natural gas electric-generating capacity was led by significant additions in new capacity from combined-cycle facilities, which almost doubled the previous year’s additions for that technology. Combined-cycle technology construction costs dropped by 4% in 2018 to $858 per kW.
Fossil fuels, or energy sources formed in the Earth’s crust from decayed organic material, including petroleum, natural gas, and coal, continue to account for the largest share of energy production and consumption in the United States. In 2019, 80% of domestic energy production was from fossil fuels, and 80% of domestic energy consumption originated from fossil fuels.
The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) publishes the U.S. total energy flow diagram to visualize U.S. energy from primary energy supply (production and imports) to disposition (consumption, exports, and net stock additions). In this diagram, losses that take place when primary energy sources are converted into electricity are allocated proportionally to the end-use sectors. The result is a visualization that associates the primary energy consumed to generate electricity with the end-use sectors of the retail electricity sales customers, even though the amount of electric energy end users directly consumed was significantly less.
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Monthly Energy Review
The share of U.S. total energy production from fossil fuels peaked in 1966 at 93%. Total fossil fuel production has continued to rise, but production has also risen for non-fossil fuel sources such as nuclear power and renewables. As a result, fossil fuels have accounted for about 80% of U.S. energy production in the past decade.
Since 2008, U.S. production of crude oil, dry natural gas, and natural gas plant liquids (NGPL) has increased by 15 quadrillion British thermal units (quads), 14 quads, and 4 quads, respectively. These increases have more than offset decreasing coal production, which has fallen 10 quads since its peak in 2008.
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Monthly Energy Review
In 2019, U.S. energy production exceeded energy consumption for the first time since 1957, and U.S. energy exports exceeded energy imports for the first time since 1952. U.S. energy net imports as a share of consumption peaked in 2005 at 30%. Although energy net imports fell below zero in 2019, many regions of the United States still import significant amounts of energy.
Most U.S. energy trade is from petroleum (crude oil and petroleum products), which accounted for 69% of energy exports and 86% of energy imports in 2019. Much of the imported crude oil is processed by U.S. refineries and is then exported as petroleum products. Petroleum products accounted for 42% of total U.S. energy exports in 2019.
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Monthly Energy Review
The share of U.S. total energy consumption that originated from fossil fuels has fallen from its peak of 94% in 1966 to 80% in 2019. The total amount of fossil fuels consumed in the United States has also fallen from its peak of 86 quads in 2007. Since then, coal consumption has decreased by 11 quads. In 2019, renewable energy consumption in the United States surpassed coal consumption for the first time. The decrease in coal consumption, along with a 3-quad decrease in petroleum consumption, more than offset an 8-quad increase in natural gas consumption.
EIA previously published articles explaining the energy flows of petroleum, natural gas, coal, and electricity. More information about total energy consumption, production, trade, and emissions is available in EIA’s Monthly Energy Review.
Principal contributor: Bill Sanchez
It was an innocuous set of words published in a newspaper in Germany on Sunday. “I hope the Russian do not force us to change our position on Nord Stream 2”, the German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas was quoted as saying. A day after that, Angela Merkel also issued a single sentence: “The German Chancellor agrees with the Foreign Minister’s comments from the weekend.” Simple words with a bold message. And potentially devastating consequences.
The incident that hardened the hearts of Germany , which had become increasingly isolated over the issue of the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline that connects Russia to Germany through the Baltic Sea, was the hospitalisation of Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny. Airlifted to Berlin following a medically-induced coma, German doctors concluded that Navalny, who is no stranger to intimidation tactics by the Putin government, was the victim of the Novichok nerve agent. If that name sounds familiar, that’s because it made headlines in 2018 over the attempted assassination of former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in Salisbury, UK. A lethal nerve agent developed in the 1970s in Soviet Russia, Novichok is among the deadliest poisons ever developed and is banned under the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. The Kremlin, predictably, denies involvement in the alleged poisoning, dismissing the German allegations as untrue.
That this could be the straw that broke the Nord Stream 2 back is perhaps surprising. The Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline has survived many obstacles. Many, many obstacles. The sequel to the original 1,222km Nord Stream that was inaugurated in November 2011, Nord Stream 2 will add 1,230km more pipeline between Vyborg in Russia and Lubin in Germany, with nearly all of the entire 2,452km length already being laid. Championed by former German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder and inherited by Merkel, the Nord Stream pipelines were developed to meet Germany’s growing energy demand, as it moved away from burning coal and nuclear fission. However, it has attracted criticism from many quarters. From Germany’s neighbours including Poland, Denmark and Estonia concerned over the pipeline that passes through their waters. From the EU, concerned about making Germany too energy dependent from a ‘politically unreliable’ country. From the US, which has threatened and, indeed, imposed sanctions on companies involved in the project. Some would argue that the vociferous US involvement, championed by President Donald Trump is self-serving, meant to allow US energy exports to muscle in, but it still fits neatly into Germany’s Russian dependence issue.
Throughout all this drama, Angela Merkel has stood firm. She, and her centre-right party CDU, have supported Nord Stream somewhat unenthusiastically with the primary concerns being the business element. It will unravel Germany’s plans to become a natural gas hub, as it tries to drive an EU movement towards cleaner energy. Many of Germany’s largest companies, include petrochemicals giant BASF and its energy arm Wintershall are also heavily invested in Nord Stream and the raw gas it will bring. It would also be a reputational risk to pull the plug on a project that is almost complete and set to be launched by the year’s end, and still leaves the critical question on how Germany will be able to address its energy deficit.
The business argument has overridden political concerns so far. But now a moral imperative has arisen through the attempted murder of Alexei Navalny, with his subsequent medical treatment in Berlin. This resonates in Germany particularly, since the country understands the historical consequences of authoritarian governments and the dangers it bring. The shifting of the political landscape, especially the rise of the Green Party has triggered a ferocious debate with high-ranking politicians from both the left and right calling for the project to be scrapped. Some are even arguing that Nord Stream 2 gas supply is no longer necessary, as the country’s energy requirements are now fundamentally shifting in a post-Covid 19 world.
If, and that is a very big if, the Nord Stream 2 is scrapped, that is at least US$9.4 billion down the drain and plenty more in collateral damage from peripheral activities. It will rock the boat when the usual Merkel instinct is to steady it. But the furore over an attempted assassination by one of the world’s deadliest methods no less, might be a stand that Germany is willing to take. After all, it knows first-hand the effects of an iron fist. Berlin has so far stood alone in advancing Nord Stream 2, even after the chorus of critics surrounding it grow louder and louder. If it were to kill the project, Germany could find plenty of supporters for that move and would be more than happy to offer themselves up as a role to scupper this ship. The options are varied, but one question remains that will influence the whole issue: how is Angela Merkel willing to go to take a stand over democratic ideals or business reality?
END OF ARTICLE
In this time of COVID-19, we have had to relook at the way we approach workplace learning. We understand that businesses can’t afford to push the pause button on capability building, as employee safety comes in first and mistakes can be very costly. That’s why we have put together a series of Virtual Instructor Led Training or VILT to ensure that there is no disruption to your workplace learning and progression.
Find courses available for Virtual Instructor Led Training through latest video conferencing technology.