Advancing Oil Spill Preparedness and Response Techniques for Arctic Conditions

2011 ◽  
Vol 2011 (1) ◽  
pp. abs105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Velez ◽  
Hanne Greiff Johnsen ◽  
Alexis Steen ◽  
Yvette Osikilo
Keyword(s):  
Sea Ice ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Distinct Advantage ◽  
Cold Temperatures ◽  
Arctic Regions ◽  
Arctic Conditions ◽  
Oil Spill Response ◽  
High Level

ABSTRACT Industrial and commercial activities in Arctic and sub-Arctic regions, including oil exploration, have increased in recent years. The 2008 circumpolar analysis by the US Geological Survey highlighted the large quantities of undiscovered oil and gas (O&G) estimated to be present. Governments of Arctic coastal states require industry to ensure a high level of environmental protection while operating in these areas. There are unique considerations which must be addressed such as: prolonged periods of darkness and daylight, cold temperatures, environmental sensitivities, indigenous peoples and their culture, distant infrastructure and remoteness, presence of seasonal/dynamic sea ice offshore, and a generally higher cost of doing business. Oil spill response (OSR) in the ice-free season can be comparable to the response in others parts of the world, with the exception of lower temperatures and extended daylight hours. The latter is a distinct advantage for OSR operations. Prevention of spills remains a top priority for industry. To address spills, if prevention is unsuccessful, the O&G industry has made significant progress over the last decades on addressing the technical challenges of operating in the Arctic. The O&G industry has also performed work to evaluate and validate OSR response measures under Arctic conditions. Oil spill response is a demanding task in any environment, but responding to spills in Arctic regions can present different challenges, especially with presence of sea ice, than to spills found in more temperate regions and opportunities exist to improve upon this existing capability. Some response techniques have been modified or specially developed for use in the Arctic. The O&G industry will undertake a joint industry research program to further address the challenges of Arctic Oil Spill Response. This paper describes the background, planning, and scope for this Joint Industry Program (JIP).

Advancing Oil Spill Response in Arctic Conditions: The Arctic Oil Spill Response Technology - Joint Industry Programme

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 (1) ◽  
pp. 960-971 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph V. Mullin
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Research Integrity ◽  
Field Research ◽  
Oil And Gas Industry ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Gas Industry ◽  
Response Strategies ◽  
Arctic Conditions ◽  
Oil Spill Response

ABSTRACT The oil and gas industry has made significant advances in being able to detect, contain and clean up spills in arctic environments. To further build on existing research and improve the technologies and methodologies for arctic oil spill response, nine oil and gas companies (BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Eni, ExxonMobil, North Caspian Operating Company, Shell, Statoil, and Total) established the Arctic Oil Spill Response Technology Joint Industry Programme (JIP). The goal of the JIP is to advance arctic oil spill response strategies and equipment as well as to increase understanding of potential impacts of oil on the arctic marine environment. Officially launched in January 2012 at the Arctic Frontiers Conference in Tromsø, Norway, the JIP has six technical working groups (TWG) each focusing on a different key area of oil spill response: dispersants; environmental effects; trajectory modeling; remote sensing; mechanical recovery and in-situ burning (ISB). There is also a field research TWG to pursue opportunities for field releases for validation of response technologies and strategies. Each TWG is led by recognized subject matter experts with years of experience in oil spill response research and operations. This JIP is bringing together the world's foremost experts on oil spill response research, development, and operations from across industry, academia, and independent research centres. Research integrity will be ensured through technical peer review and public dissemination of results. This paper describes the scope and current progress of this Joint Industry Program (JIP).

Advances from Arctic Oil Spill Response Research

2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 (1) ◽  
pp. 1487-1506 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph V. Mullin
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Field Tests ◽  
Field Research ◽  
Oil And Gas Industry ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Research Projects ◽  
Effective Response ◽  
Oil Spill Response

Abstract 2017-161 Over the past four decades, the oil and gas industry has made significant advances in being able to detect, contain and clean up spills and mitigate the residual consequences in Arctic environments. Many of these advances were achieved through collaborative research programs involving industry, academic and government partners. The Arctic Oil Spill Response Technology - Joint Industry Programme (JIP), was launched in 2012 and completed in early 2017 with the objectives of building on an already extensive knowledge base to further improve Arctic spill response capabilities and better understand the environmental issues involved in selecting and implementing the most effective response strategies. The JIP was a collaboration of nine oil and gas companies (BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Eni, ExxonMobil, North Caspian Operating Company, Shell, Statoil, and Total) and focused on six key areas of oil spill response: dispersants; environmental effects; trajectory modeling; remote sensing; mechanical recovery and in-situ burning. The JIP provided a vehicle for sharing knowledge among the participants and international research institutions and disseminating information to regulators, the public and stakeholders. The network of engaged scientists and government agencies increased opportunities to develop and test oil spill response technologies while raising awareness of industry efforts to advance the existing capabilities in Arctic oil spill response. The JIP consisted of two phases, the first included technical assessments and state of knowledge reviews resulting in a library of sixteen documents available on the JIP website. The majority of the JIP efforts focused on Phase 2, actual experiments, and included laboratory, small and medium scale tank tests, and field research experiments. Three large-scale field tests were conducted in the winter and spring months of 2014–2016 including recent participation of the JIP in the 2016 NOFO oil on water exercise off Norway. The JIP was the largest pan-industry programme dedicated to oil spill response in the Arctic, ever carried out. Twenty seven research projects were successfully and safely conducted by the world’s foremost experts on oil spill response from across industry, academia, and independent scientific institutions in ten countries. The overarching goal of the research was to address the differing aspects involved in oil spill response, including the methods used, and their applicability to the Arctic’s unique conditions. All research projects were conducted using established protocols and proven scientific technologies, some of which were especially adjusted for ice conditions. This paper describes the scope of the research conducted, results, and key findings. The JIP is committed to full transparency in disseminating the results through peer reviewed journal articles, and all JIP research reports are available free of charge at www.arcticresponsetechnology.org.

In Situ Oil Spill Countermeasures in Ice-Infested Waters: A Modeling Study of the Fate/Behaviours of Spilled Oil

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 (1) ◽  
pp. 1215-1225 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haibo Niu ◽  
Kenneth Lee ◽  
Michel C. Boufadel ◽  
Lin Zhao ◽  
Brian Robinson
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Arctic Region ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Oil Transport ◽  
Habitat Recovery ◽  
Dispersed Oil ◽  
Oil Biodegradation ◽  
Arctic Conditions ◽  
Spilled Oil

ABSTRACT The expansion of offshore oil and gas and marine transport activities in the Arctic have raised the level of risk for an oil spill to occur in the Arctic region. Existing technologies for oil spill cleanup in ice-covered conditions are limited and there is a need for improved oil spill countermeasures for use under Arctic conditions. A recent field study has assessed a proposed oil spill response technique in ice-infested waters based on the application of fine minerals in a slurry with mixing by propeller-wash to promote the formation of oil-mineral aggregates (OMA). While it was verified in the experimental study that the dispersion was enhanced and mineral fine additions promoted habitat recovery by enhancing both the rate and extent of oil biodegradation, limited monitoring data provide little insights on the fate of dispersed oil after the response. To help understand the oil transport process following mineral treatment in ice-covered conditions, mathematical modeling was used in this study to simulate the transport of OMA and calculate the mass balances of the spilled oil. To study the effects of ice and minerals on the fate and transport, the result was compared with scenarios without ice and without the addition of mineral fines. The results show general agreement between the modeling results and field observations, and further confirm the effectiveness and potential for using mineral treatment as a new oil spill counter-measure technology. This technique offers several operational advantages for use under Arctic conditions, including reduced number of personnel required for its application, lack of need for waste disposal sites, and cost effectiveness.

SPILL IMPACT MITIGATION ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK FOR OIL SPILL RESPONSE PLANNING IN THE ARCTIC ENVIRONMENT

2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 (1) ◽  
pp. 2017-351 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hilary Robinson ◽  
William Gardiner ◽  
Richard J. Wenning ◽  
Mary Ann Rempel-Hester
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Environmental Benefits ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Arctic Ecosystems ◽  
Oil And Gas Development ◽  
Response Planning ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Oil Spill Response ◽  
Different Response

ABSTRACT #2017-351 When there is risk for oil release into the marine environment, the priority for planners and responders is to protect human health and to minimize environmental impacts. The selection of appropriate response option(s) depends upon a wide range of information including data on the fate and behavior of oil and treated oil, the habitats and organisms that are potentially exposed, and the potential for effects and recovery following exposure. Spill Impact Management Assessment (SIMA; a refinement of Net Environmental Benefits Analysis, or NEBA, in the context of oil spill response) and similar comparative risk assessment (CRA) approaches provide responders a systematic method to compare and contrast the relative environmental benefits and consequences of different response alternatives. Government and industry stakeholders have used this approach increasingly in temperate and subtropical regions to establish environmental protection priorities and identify response strategies during planning that minimize impacts and maximize the potential for environmental recovery. Historically, the ability to conduct CRA-type assessments in the Arctic has been limited by insufficient information relevant to oil-spill response decision making. However, with an increased interest in shipping and oil and gas development in the Arctic, a sufficiently robust scientific and ecological information base is emerging in the Arctic that can support meaningful SIMA. Based on a summary of over 3,000 literature references on Arctic ecosystems and the fate and effects of oil and treated oil in the Arctic, we identify key input parameters supporting a SIMA evaluation of oil spill response in the Arctic and introduce a web portal developed to facilitate access to the literature and key considerations supporting SIMA.

SPILL IMPACT MITIGATION ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK FOR OIL SPILL RESPONSE PLANNING IN THE ARCTIC ENVIRONMENT

2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 (1) ◽  
pp. 1325-1344 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hilary Robinson ◽  
William Gardiner ◽  
Richard J. Wenning ◽  
Mary Ann Rempel-Hester
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Environmental Benefits ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Arctic Ecosystems ◽  
Oil And Gas Development ◽  
Response Planning ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Oil Spill Response ◽  
Different Response

ABSTRACT #2017-351 When there is risk for oil release into the marine environment, the priority for planners and responders is to protect human health and to minimize environmental impacts. The selection of appropriate response option(s) depends upon a wide range of information including data on the fate and behavior of oil and treated oil, the habitats and organisms that are potentially exposed, and the potential for effects and recovery following exposure. Spill Impact Management Assessment (SIMA; a refinement of Net Environmental Benefits Analysis, or NEBA, in the context of oil spill response) and similar comparative risk assessment (CRA) approaches provide responders a systematic method to compare and contrast the relative environmental benefits and consequences of different response alternatives. Government and industry stakeholders have used this approach increasingly in temperate and subtropical regions to establish environmental protection priorities and identify response strategies during planning that minimize impacts and maximize the potential for environmental recovery. Historically, the ability to conduct CRA-type assessments in the Arctic has been limited by insufficient information relevant to oil-spill response decision making. However, with an increased interest in shipping and oil and gas development in the Arctic, a sufficiently robust scientific and ecological information base is emerging in the Arctic that can support meaningful SIMA. Based on a summary of over 3,000 literature references on Arctic ecosystems and the fate and effects of oil and treated oil in the Arctic, we identify key input parameters supporting a SIMA evaluation of oil spill response in the Arctic and introduce a web portal developed to facilitate access to the literature and key considerations supporting SIMA.

Impact of Arctic Met ocean Conditions on Oil Spill Response: Results of the First Circumpolar Response Viability Analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 (1) ◽  
pp. 2017172
Author(s):  
Jens Peter Holst-Andersen ◽  
Synnøve Lunde ◽  
David M. Moore ◽  
Hans Petter Dahlslett ◽  
Odd Willy Brude ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Geographic Variations ◽  
Analytical Methodology ◽  
Viability Analysis ◽  
Arctic Conditions ◽  
Oil Spill Response ◽  
Response Systems ◽  
Ocean Conditions ◽  
Different Response

There is widespread recognition that Arctic conditions can challenge marine oil spill response by limiting countermeasure effectiveness and, in extreme cases, even preventing their use. The Arctic Council's Emergency Prevention, Preparedness, and Response (EPPR) Workgroup implemented a response viability analysis to estimate how often different types of response systems could be deployed in different areas of the Arctic based on historical met ocean conditions. This approach, implemented previously in several circumpolar sub-regions, quantifies the effects of met ocean conditions on response techniques by comparing the operating limits for different response systems to a hind cast of met ocean data. Response systems include options for mechanical recovery, chemical dispersants, and in-situ burning. Met ocean conditions in the dataset used include wind, sea state, temperature, sea ice coverage, horizontal visibility, and daylight/darkness. Additional conditions are discussed qualitatively. For each response system studied, the results indicate how often use of that system may be favorable, marginal, or not recommended. Seasonal and geographic variations in the results can inform response contingency planning. Examining the met ocean condition that most frequently impacts a system can also inform needed technological improvements or modifications. EPPR convened experts to provide input to the analysis, including the initial project scoping and development of baseline systems and limits. This paper discusses the project process as well as the analytical methodology, key inputs, assumptions, and results.

Developing a National Oil Spill Response System in the Caspian Region: Turkmenistan Case Study1

2001 ◽  
Vol 2001 (1) ◽  
pp. 513-515
Author(s):  
Peter Mark Taylor ◽  
James Anthony Thornborough ◽  
Mehrdad Nazari
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Digital Media ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Former Soviet Union ◽  
Success Factors ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Caspian Region ◽  
Response System ◽  
Oil Spill Response ◽  
High Level

ABSTRACT The collapse of the former Soviet Union a decade ago has led to increasing interest in the Caspian region as a source of crude oil and gas for global markets. This paper explains the project scope and the framework under which a sustainable national oil spill response system is being developed in Turkmenistan, a former Soviet Republic and one of the Caspian's littoral states. The key success factors of the oil spill contingency planning project in Turkmenistan, which are believed to be relevant for similar activities under development in other parts of the Caspian region, include the support of high-level government representation; a participatory and cross-sectoral approach; adopting a standardized process based on international guidance and Conventions; alliance of local and international experts to provide input and support the progress of the project; and accumulation of knowledge and its dissemination using digital media.

International Ice Services’ Planning for an Arctic Oil Spill Response

2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 (1) ◽  
pp. 1166-1181
Author(s):  
CDR Gabrielle G. McGrath
Keyword(s):  
Sea Ice ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Working Group ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Arctic Council ◽  
Effective Response ◽  
Oil Companies ◽  
Contact Information ◽  
Oil Spill Response

ABSTRACT 2017-382 Formed in 1999, the International Ice Charting Working Group (IICWG) is a consortium of the ice services from all over the world. The operational ice services representing nations from both the Northern and Southern Hemispheres, including all eight Arctic Council nations, come together with a common goal of promoting cooperation between the world’s ice centers on all matters concerning sea ice and icebergs. In 2013, the IICWG began to focus on how the ice services can support an emergency response in ice-laden waters. This focus was on providing current and forecasted information on sea ice and iceberg conditions in the area of the incident as well as for the shipping routes approaching the area. With rapidly changing sea ice, ice information would be critical to planning an effective response. The IICWG formed a partnership with the International Tanker Owners Pollution Federation Limited (ITOPF) and Oil Spill Response Limited (OSRL) in 2015 to expand the awareness of the ice services and their capabilities to the oil companies and oil spill removal organizations. In 2016, the IICWG conducted an unannounced emergency notification exercise to validate the contact information for each of the ice services. In an effort to ensure responders would be able to access the most accurate contact information, IICWG published this ice services’ contact list worldwide in classification society periodicals. The preparations of these nations culminated in a Tabletop Exercise at the group’s annual meeting in October 2016 in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. The exercise scenario involved a major oil spill response in ice-infested waters with participants from the ice services, maritime users, satellite data providers, and OSRL. The lessons learned from this exercise will prepare all of the ice services for a coordinated oil spill response. The IICWG also collaborated with the Arctic Council Emergency Prevention, Preparedness, and Response Working Group for future exercises and planning.

Comparative Analysis of Oil Spill Response Methods in the Arctic Seas

2020 ◽  
pp. 18-26
Author(s):  
A.A. Gorbunov ◽  
◽  
S.I. Shepelyuk ◽  
A.G. Nesterenko ◽  
K.I. Drapey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Arctic Seas ◽  
Oil Spill Response

THE APPROACHES TO THE SOLVING ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC PROBLEMS OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT ON THE SHELF OF THE ARCTIC SEAS OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Krivichev ◽  
Alexander Krivichev
Keyword(s):  
Continental Shelf ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Marginal Stability ◽  
Environmental Benefit ◽  
Arctic Seas ◽  
Dynamic Simulations ◽  
Economic Problems ◽  
Technogenic Loads ◽  
Oil Spill Response

Russian Arctic shelf - rich larder of the hydrocarbons, at the same time Northern Sea Route (NSR) - a strategically important route for transporting them. The extraction and the transportation of the hydrocarbons along the NSR requires the solution of a number of ecological and economic problems in the first place to ensure environmental and technogenic safety. For the solving of these problems on the continental shelf it is required a system of comprehensive measures: - the development of the regulatory framework for environmental support oil and gas projects; - the introduction and use of integrated methods for monitoring environmental conditions at the sites of technogenic loads on the shelf of the Arctic seas, including the use of drones; - creating different models for assessing the marginal stability of ecosystems to technogenic loads during production and transportation of hydrocarbons on the continental shelf based on systems of dynamic simulations; - the development and use of sensitivity maps of coastal areas of the Arctic seas during oil spill response; - accounting of the results of the analysis of the total environmental benefit in the development of oil spill response plans; - application of the principle of "zero" resetting, due to the high fishery valuation in Barents and Kara seas and the conservation of marine biological resources.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document