Can you tell us a bit about yourself, your role and your company?

It’s an honor to join the EPC, Energy Projects Conference this year.

I bring over 25 years of combined experience in the aerospace and oil & gas industries, with a strong focus on engineering execution, project and program development, and risk management.

I began my career in aerospace as a Manufacturing Engineering Lead at Cessna Aircraft, where I focused on avionics and electrical integration. That experience sharpened my skills in precision, compliance, safety, and complex system management.

Over the last 15+ years, I’ve worked in the oil and gas midstream sector, leading major efforts in Integrity Program Management, Risk Management, SCADA, leak detection, and Pipeline & Terminal operations. I’ve helped organizations navigate the challenges of technical complexity, regulatory compliance, and system integration across large capital programs.

I also have a strong academic foundation. I serve as a faculty member teaching Engineering, Business and Management courses, and I recently completed my Terminal Degree as Doctor of Business Administration in Fall 2024, with a research focus on Mega-Project Management Failure, Risk Threat Allocation, and Mitigation, especially the human and organizational factors that drive success or failure in large energy projects.

My work now focuses on helping companies and teams improve performance where it matters most: at the intersection of people, strategy, and execution."

Can you comment on the role the midstream sector will play in the development of energy transition projects, including hydrogen, ammonia, and CCUS? How can midstream players live up to their full potential within the development of these emerging industries?

The midstream sector is going to be a critical enabler of the energy transition, particularly for scalable solutions like hydrogen, ammonia, and carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS). These aren’t just technical challenges, they’re infrastructure challenges, and that’s where midstream has decades of experience and a natural role to play.

Transporting hydrogen or CO₂ safely and efficiently, or managing ammonia as a carrier or fuel, will require new pipeline systems, repurposed assets, storage solutions, compression technology, and enhanced monitoring capabilities. These are all core competencies of the midstream industry.

But to live up to their full potential, midstream companies will need to adapt in four key areas:

• Infrastructure Readiness. Midstream must invest in retrofitting existing pipelines for hydrogen or CO₂ service and designing new corridors with materials and safety standards specific to these molecules.

• Partnerships Across the Value Chain. Hydrogen, ammonia, and CCUS projects are highly integrated. Midstream players must get involved upstream in planning, not just downstream in execution. That means collaborating with producers, technology providers, utilities, and regulators from day one.

• Regulatory Navigation & Permitting. These emerging industries face a lot of regulatory uncertainty. Midstream companies are well-positioned to lead, given their familiarity with pipeline permitting, safety compliance, and environmental impact management.

• Digital Transformation & Risk Management. The transition introduces new risks from operability to public perception. Midstream players will need advanced SCADA systems, AI-based leak detection, digital twins, and predictive integrity tools to ensure safe and transparent operations.

In short, the midstream sector isn’t just transporting energy anymore, it’s transporting the future. The companies that embrace this role strategically and invest in both infrastructure and cross-sector collaboration, will not only remain relevant they’ll become essential to achieving global decarbonization goals.

More broadly, what are the key challenges you are facing in project development?

Across the board, the challenges we’re facing in project development today are less about technical limitations and more about complexity, integration, and human dynamics.From my experience in both aerospace and oil & gas, and especially in mega-projects, I would say the top challenges include:

• Stakeholder Misalignment: One of the most persistent challenges is getting all stakeholders owners, contractors, regulators, communities aligned on goals, risk tolerance, and execution priorities. When this alignment isn’t established early, it leads to scope creep, rework, and friction across the lifecycle.

• Underinvestment in Front-End Planning: There’s often a rush to move into execution before properly developing scope, risk registers, and interface plans. Especially in energy transition projects, where uncertainty is high, this lack of thorough FEL work creates downstream delays and budget overruns.

• Regulatory Uncertainty and Permitting Delays: With emerging technologies like hydrogen and CCUS, permits, standards, and regulatory frameworks are still evolving. This creates uncertainty in timelines and capital allocation, and it often slows investment decisions.

• Human Factor Risks: Communication breakdowns, siloed teams, and leadership fatigue remain real risks especially in complex environments with global teams and rotating contractors. PMP frameworks help, but they don’t fully address the behavioural and cultural challenges that affect decision-making and execution discipline.

• Integration of Digital Tools

We have the technology digital twins, predictive analytics, real-time integrity monitoring but many projects still struggle to integrate these tools seamlessly across engineering, construction, and operations. There’s often a gap between what’s available and what’s actually adopted.

Ultimately, successful project development today requires a much deeper focus on risk-based decision-making, stakeholder strategy, and digital transformation with strong leadership guiding alignment at every stage.

How important is the relationship between owner and EPC? And what advice would you give to owners on how to work most effectively with their EPC partner?

At the Energy Projects Conference, we talk a lot about project success and in my view, that starts with the relationship between the project owner and their delivery partners.

The most successful projects are those where the owner and EPC or any lead contractor function as strategic partners, not adversaries.

My advice to owners:

• Engage the delivery partner early, during project definition, not just execution.

• Align on risk-sharing, accountability, and decision-making models before the first shovel hits the ground.

• Create joint governance structures, not just reporting lines and stick to them.

• Promote transparency and trust, even when difficult conversations arise.

• Incentivize shared outcomes safety, quality, innovation not just timelines.

Ultimately, the success of any energy project depends not just on engineering or procurement, but on how well people collaborate under pressure. That’s a theme we’re seeing more of and rightly so at this year’s conference.

 

How much of a constraint are workforce shortages likely to be, and what can be done to address this?

Workforce shortages are already a critical constraint and they’re only going to intensify as the energy sector accelerates into decarbonization, digitalization, and infrastructure expansion.

In both the oil & gas and energy transition spaces whether you’re working on hydrogen, CCUS, pipelines, terminals, or digital systems we’re seeing a convergence of skill gaps:

• A shortage of experienced project managers who can lead multidisciplinary, high-risk projects.

• A lack of technicians and field engineers trained on emerging technologies like hydrogen systems or advanced SCADA platforms.

• And a widening divide between traditional operations expertise and the digital and data analytics skills needed for modern project execution.

To address this, I think we need a multi-layered approach:

• Invest in Cross-Training and Upskilling: Leverage the deep knowledge of existing personnel by giving them access to training in new energy systems, digital tools, and risk-based thinking.

• Partner with Academia and Vocational Programs: We need to work more closely with universities, community colleges, and technical institutes to build energy project pipelines that include digital fluency, systems integration, and behavioural safety.

• Rethink Talent Models: Consider shared resource pools, flexible project staffing models, and more diverse recruitment strategies especially tapping into underrepresented groups, transitioning military personnel, and adjacent industries like aerospace or tech.

• Embrace Digital as a Workforce Multiplier: AI, digital twins, and remote operations tools can’t replace the workforce, but they can extend it. These tools reduce travel, downtime, and manual data collection, freeing up human capital for more critical decision-making.

At the end of the day, solving workforce shortages isn’t just about finding people it’s about building adaptive capability across the organization. That’s going to be one of the defining challenges and opportunities of the next decade in energy project delivery.

Do you expect design and execution strategies for midstream projects to evolve over the coming years, and if so, how? What is the outlook for modularization?

Yes, we’re already seeing the design and execution strategies for midstream projects evolve, and that shift will accelerate in the coming years.

The drivers are clear: cost pressure, tighter schedules, workforce constraints, ESG expectations, and the complexity of new energy systems like hydrogen, ammonia, and CCUS.In response, project teams are moving toward more agile, risk-aware, and digitally enabled approaches. I expect several big changes in how midstream projects are executed:

• Front-End Loading Will Get Smarter and Deeper: The focus will shift toward integrated FEL planning that accounts for constructability, operability, stakeholder engagement, and permitting earlier in the process. Front-end missteps have been a major contributor to project failure especially when it comes to risk ownership and scope alignment.

• Execution Strategies Will Be More Collaborative and Flexible: We’ll see more early contractor involvement (ECI), shared digital platforms, and flexible contracting models that allow for faster design adaptation and more proactive risk management. This is especially important in fast-moving energy transition projects.

• Modularization Will Play a Larger Role. But Selectively: Modularization isn’t new, but it’s gaining momentum as a solution to labor shortages, cost control, and schedule compression.

For midstream, I see modularization being used more frequently for:

• Compression stations and dehydration units.

• Measurement and metering skids.

• Hydrogen blending and purification modules.

• CO₂ capture and injection units

The key is applying modularization strategically where the scope is standardized, the interfaces are well-understood, and the supply chain can support it. It’s not one-size-fits-all, but when done right, it reduces risk, improves quality, and accelerates delivery.

• Digital Integration Will Define Success: From 3D digital twins and AI-based risk forecasting to automated fabrication tracking, the integration of digital tools will increasingly drive efficiency in both design and execution. This is how we close the gap between engineering, construction, and operations.

In short, the midstream sector is entering a phase where traditional execution models will no longer be enough. We need strategies that are faster, more modular, more digital, and more integrated, and that’s where the real competitive edge will be in the years ahead.

 

What do you see as the key pillars to successful project execution?

In my experience, whether in aerospace, midstream oil & gas, or large-scale energy transition projects, successful project execution is built on five core pillars. These pillars go beyond traditional scope, schedule, and budget metrics. They reflect the complexity of today’s energy environment and the human systems behind every major capital project.

• Early Stakeholder Alignment: This is the foundation. Without alignment among owners, contractors, regulators, and community stakeholders, even the most well-planned project will hit friction. Success starts with shared goals, a common risk philosophy, and open communication well before construction begins.

• Front-End Planning Discipline: Strong front-end loading (FEL) remains a hallmark of project success. Clear scope definition, risk identification, interface management, and constructability reviews must be done with intent not as a checkbox. Projects fail when they try to save time by skipping planning.

• Integrated Risk and Change Management: Risk management needs to be dynamic not static. The best projects use real-time risk registers, proactive change control, and leadership check-ins to make informed decisions under uncertainty. Integration across technical, financial, and human risk is key.

• People-Centric Leadership and Communication: Projects are executed by people not Gantt charts. That means creating a culture of accountability, transparency, and psychological safety, where teams escalate issues early and solve problems collaboratively. Leadership must set that tone from day one.

• Digital Enablement and Data-Driven Execution: We now have tools like digital twins, AI-powered forecasting, automated QA/QC, and real-time performance dashboards. Successful execution means integrating these tools into workflows not just adopting them in silos.

In short, successful project execution requires alignment, foresight, adaptability, leadership, and technology working in sync. When even one of those pillars is missing, project risk increases exponentially.

 

How do you navigate regulatory uncertainty and what would you want from the new administration in the US in order to help the midstream sector? What are your expectations based on what you’ve seen of the Trump administration’s energy policy direction so far?

Navigating regulatory uncertainty has become a core part of project risk management, especially in the midstream sector, where permitting, environmental compliance, and stakeholder engagement can make or break project timelines.

From my experience, we approach regulatory uncertainty the same way we approach technical uncertainty through proactive scenario planning, strong stakeholder mapping, and front-end strategy alignment.

Successful project teams today don’t wait for clarity they build parallel regulatory strategies, engage early with local and federal agencies, and anticipate how community sentiment or policy shifts could impact execution. It’s not easy, but it’s necessary.

Looking ahead under the new Trump administration, I’d say our expectations are cautiously optimistic especially when it comes to streamlining permitting processes, encouraging infrastructure development, and reducing federal red tape.

That said, while there may be more support for traditional energy infrastructure, there’s still a need for clear, consistent guidance around emerging areas like:

• CO₂ pipeline permitting and CCUS regulatory pathways.

• Hydrogen blending standards and safety frameworks.

• Public-private partnerships for energy corridor development.

What the industry really needs from the administration regardless of party is:

• Consistency across federal agencies to prevent conflicting interpretations that delay progress.

• Predictable permitting timelines with defined review processes and faster interagency coordination.

• Support for innovation, including funding and policy frameworks for hydrogen, ammonia, and carbon capture projects.

If the administration can provide regulatory stability, interagency alignment, and a balanced approach to energy development, the midstream sector will be well-positioned to support both economic growth and the energy transition.

At the end of the day, we don’t need policies that pick winners; we need policies that create certainty, transparency, and flexibility to build responsibly at scale.

There has been pushback to major energy projects from environmental groups and some local communities. How serious are these threats to major energy project development in the US, do you think? And how are you seeing owners/operators/project developers adapt to address these new challenges?

The pushback from environmental groups and local communities is very real, and I believe it represents one of the most serious and enduring non-technical threats to energy project development in the U.S.

We’re no longer in an era where permitting and public engagement are just checkboxes. Projects can be delayed, re-routed, or cancelled entirely due to local resistance, environmental litigation, or social license issues. Keystone XL, Atlantic Coast Pipeline, and even certain CCUS corridors have faced this kind of disruption and it’s reshaping how projects are planned.

That said, I also see a shift happening, project developers are starting to adapt more strategically and proactively. 

A few key approaches stand out:

• Community Engagement is Starting Earlier: Leading companies are engaging communities during the conceptual and pre-FEED stages, not just after permits are filed. They’re investing in listening sessions, economic impact discussions, and collaborative problem-solving to build trust before opposition solidifies.

• Environmental and Social Risk Is Now Embedded in Project Planning: Environmental impact assessments are no longer just technical documents, they’re part of the project’s risk strategy. Developers are using ESG-informed design decisions, such as low-impact routing or habitat offsets, to reduce opposition before it starts.

• More Transparency, Less Spin: There’s a growing recognition that authenticity matters. Owners and operators are sharing more data publicly, inviting independent review, and being honest about risks and trade-offs, not just highlighting the economic upside. This transparency helps build credibility.

• Regulatory Strategy Is Becoming More Adaptive: With permitting processes more vulnerable to litigation or political shifts, project teams are building parallel strategies, investing in legal scenario planning, and designing flexible execution paths that can adapt if part of the project faces resistance.

At the end of the day, the most resilient projects are the ones that treat public trust as a design parameter, not a Public Relation challenge. The companies that understand this and act on it early will be the ones that lead the next generation of energy development in the U.S.

 

What is your outlook for the future, and what do you want from the industry as you look ahead?

I’m optimistic about the future, but only if we evolve. The energy industry is entering a pivotal moment, where we’re being asked to deliver large-scale infrastructure faster, safer, and more sustainably, while managing rising complexity, regulatory uncertainty, and workforce challenges.

My outlook is that the industry will succeed, but not by doing more of the same. Success will come from rethinking how we define and deliver projects. That includes:

• Moving from rigid execution models to adaptive, data-informed strategies.

• Embedding human factor risk and stakeholder alignment into our core planning assumptions.

• Taking digital tools beyond dashboards and into real-time decision-making.

• And treating community engagement and environmental performance as business-critical functions, not side conversations

What I want from the industry as we look ahead is threefold:

• A Cultural Shift Toward Transparency and Collaboration: We need less finger-pointing and more shared accountability. That means building partnerships that focus on solving problems early, not litigating them later.

• Bold Investment in People and Capabilities: If we want resilient infrastructure, we need resilient talent. That includes cross-training, leadership development, and attracting new skill sets from adjacent sectors.

• Courage to Lead Through Complexity: We can’t wait for certainty. I want to see owners, EPCs, and regulators make courageous decisions grounded in clear principles, smart risk allocation, and trust.

I believe the energy industry has the resources, expertise, and reach to lead the next wave of global infrastructure development but it will take new thinking, empowered teams, and a willingness to challenge legacy habits. That’s the future I’m committed to helping build.