Contingencies	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2022
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Contingencies	(16) Contingencies Due to the nature of our business, we are involved, from time to time, in various routine litigation or subject to disputes or claims or actions, including those commercial in nature, regarding our business activities in the ordinary course of business. Legal costs related to these matters are expensed as incurred. Management is of the opinion that none of the claims and actions will have a material adverse impact on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows. A subsidiary of ours is involved in legal proceedings with two former employees regarding the payment of royalties for a patentable product paid for by the subsidiary and developed while they worked for the subsidiary. Those former employees have filed separate two lawsuits in the Harris County District Court, in which the former employees allege that the royalty payments they had invoiced at 25% and for which they received payments in the invoiced amounts since 2010, instead should have been paid at a rate of 50%. The first lawsuit (the “First Case”), filed during the second quarter of 2018, sought to recover alleged unpaid royalties from May 2014 through May 2019. The second lawsuit (the “Second Case”) was filed in the same district court against the same subsidiary of ours, brought the same claims, and sought damages post-judgment from the First Case until the discontinuation of the leasing of the product at issue by the subsidiary at the end of 2019. In both lawsuits, the district court ruled against our subsidiary and entered final judgments, which we fully secured with a bond. We strongly disagreed with the result and believed the district court committed several legal errors that should be corrected by reversal of each of the judgments. Accordingly, we pursued separate appeals in the Fourteenth Court of Appeals In August 2022, in the appeal from the judgment in the First Case, the Fourteenth Court of Appeals (the "Court of Appeals") ruled in favor of our subsidiary on the plaintiffs’ claims for a combined 50% royalty. The Court of Appeals ruled that because the plaintiffs invoiced our subsidiary for a combined 25% royalty and accepted payments in that amount every month since 2010, the plaintiffs forever waived any claim to any royalties in any amount other than a combined 25% royalty, net of expenses. The Court of Appeals reversed the judgment in the First Case and remanded to the district court to assess damages, if any, owed for royalties between January 2018 and May 2019. The appeal from the judgment in the Second Case was abated by the Fourteenth Court of Appeals pending the resolution of the appeal in the First Case. On October 7, 2022, our subsidiary reached a confidential settlement in both the First Case and the Second Case with the plaintiffs to resolve any and all disputes between them. At the request of both parties in the appeals from both the First Case and the Second Case, the Fourteenth Court of Appeals has reversed the respective judgments entered by the district court. The district court has now entered take-nothing judgments in favor of our subsidiary in both cases and has released the supersedeas bonds filed by our subsidiary in both cases. Accordingly, both the First Case and the Second Case are fully and finally resolved. Our Indian subsidiary, SES Energy Services India Pvt. Ltd (“SES India”), entered into a contract with an Indian oil and gas company to provide an offshore vessel for well stimulation. A dispute arose over the performability of the terms of the contract. The contract was terminated by the customer. Any remaining contingency under this contract was terminated in connection with SES India entering into bankruptcy during 2022. In October 2022, we had a hearing before the Washington State Board of Tax Appeals (the “Tax Board”) in relation to a dispute arising in April 2019 pertaining to a use tax assessment from 2016 as a result of the construction of a vessel by one of our subsidiaries. As of December 31, 2022, the assessment, including interest, totaled $26.9 million. While we are confident that the assessment is legally insupportable, if the Tax Board upholds the assessment we will be responsible for payment of the full assessment within thirty days of the decision. Although we are unable to estimate the probability of the outcome of this matter or the range of reasonably possible loss, if any, we have reserved an amount we believe to be adequate to cover any final assessment levied by the state.

Contingencies

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2022

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

(16) Contingencies

Due to the nature of our business, we are involved, from time to time, in various routine litigation or subject to disputes or claims or actions, including those commercial in nature, regarding our business activities in the ordinary course of business. Legal costs related to these matters are expensed as incurred. Management is of the opinion that none of the claims and actions will have a material adverse impact on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

A subsidiary of ours is involved in legal proceedings with two former employees regarding the payment of royalties for a patentable product paid for by the subsidiary and developed while they worked for the subsidiary. Those former employees have filed separate two lawsuits in the Harris County District Court, in which the former employees allege that the royalty payments they had invoiced at 25% and for which they received payments in the invoiced amounts since 2010, instead should have been paid at a rate of 50%. The first lawsuit (the “First Case”), filed during the second quarter of 2018, sought to recover alleged unpaid royalties from May 2014 through May 2019. The second lawsuit (the “Second Case”) was filed in the same district court against the same subsidiary of ours, brought the same claims, and sought damages post-judgment from the First Case until the discontinuation of the leasing of the product at issue by the subsidiary at the end of 2019.

In both lawsuits, the district court ruled against our subsidiary and entered final judgments, which we fully secured with a bond. We strongly disagreed with the result and believed the district court committed several legal errors that should be corrected by reversal of each of the judgments. Accordingly, we pursued separate appeals in the Fourteenth Court of Appeals

In August 2022, in the appeal from the judgment in the First Case, the Fourteenth Court of Appeals (the "Court of Appeals") ruled in favor of our subsidiary on the plaintiffs’ claims for a combined 50% royalty. The Court of Appeals ruled that because the plaintiffs invoiced our subsidiary for a combined 25% royalty and accepted payments in that amount every month since 2010, the plaintiffs forever waived any claim to any royalties in any amount other than a combined 25% royalty, net of expenses. The Court of Appeals reversed the judgment in the First Case and remanded to the district court to assess damages, if any, owed for royalties between January 2018 and May 2019.

The appeal from the judgment in the Second Case was abated by the Fourteenth Court of Appeals pending the resolution of the appeal in the First Case.

On October 7, 2022, our subsidiary reached a confidential settlement in both the First Case and the Second Case with the plaintiffs to resolve any and all disputes between them. At the request of both parties in the appeals from both the First Case and the Second Case, the Fourteenth Court of Appeals has reversed the respective judgments entered by the district court. The district court has now entered take-nothing judgments in favor of our subsidiary in both cases and has released the supersedeas bonds filed by our subsidiary in both cases. Accordingly, both the First Case and the Second Case are fully and finally resolved.

Our Indian subsidiary, SES Energy Services India Pvt. Ltd (“SES India”), entered into a contract with an Indian oil and gas company to provide an offshore vessel for well stimulation. A dispute arose over the performability of the terms of the contract. The contract was terminated by the customer. Any remaining contingency under this contract was terminated in connection with SES India entering into bankruptcy during 2022.

In October 2022, we had a hearing before the Washington State Board of Tax Appeals (the “Tax Board”) in relation to a dispute arising in April 2019 pertaining to a use tax assessment from 2016 as a result of the construction of a vessel by one of our subsidiaries. As of December 31, 2022, the assessment, including interest, totaled $26.9 million. While we are confident that the assessment is legally insupportable, if the Tax Board upholds the assessment we will be responsible for payment of the full assessment within thirty days of the decision. Although we are unable to estimate the probability of the outcome of this matter or the range of reasonably possible loss, if any, we have reserved an amount we believe to be adequate to cover any final assessment levied by the state.