Angola Coastal Mapping and Tactics for Oil Spill Response

2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 (1) ◽  
pp. 850-862
Author(s):  
Elliott Taylor ◽  
Andy Graham ◽  
Jose Rios ◽  
Jean-Yves Huet ◽  
Lindsay Page-Jones ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Oil And Gas Industry ◽  
Operational Definition ◽  
Aerial Photos ◽  
Coastal Mapping ◽  
Response Planning ◽  
Other Information ◽  
Oil Spill Response ◽  
Human Use

ABSTRACT The Angolan oil and gas industry workgroup (ACEPA-Associação das Companhias de Exploração e Produção de Angola) continues to collaborate in the development and completion of oil spill response initiatives as responsible operators and committed participants in the IMO-IPIECA Global Initiative for West, Central and Southern Africa (GI WACAF). Between 2012–2015, a comprehensive program of oil spill response planning, geodatabase development, mapping, and guides were completed for the entire coast of Angola. Low altitude aerial video surveys that combine oblique imagery and a verbal commentary record were recorded as the foundation for mapping coastal sensitivities, ESI characterization, shore zone and backshore operational definition, and shoreline segmentation. Other information added to the coastal geodatabase includes operational and logistical considerations such as land access and boat launch locations, proposed sites for staging, holding of temporary wastes, industrial and human use (fishing, recreational), and nearshore access constraints. A key aspect of the shoreline mapping effort was to build the information into a stand-alone pre-shoreline cleanup assessment technique (SCAT)-database that provides layered information for each of the 1999 shoreline segments. Digital video and high-resolution oblique aerial photos for 2400 km of coastline are geo-referenced and integrated into the GIS system with viewer software that allows the user to “fly” the shoreline. Shoreline attributes for biological, socioeconomic, and human use were used to rank 117 sensitive sites. The 45 highest priority sensitive sites were surveyed and detailed geographic response plans (GRPs) for site protection strategies and tactics were compiled into two atlases. The comprehensive coastal characterization, segmentation, and priority site protection plans provide the Angola government and oil industry with spill preparedness tools that are world-class.

REVIEW OF BRAZILIAN REGULATION FOR FACILITY OIL SPILL RESPONSE PLANNING

2008 ◽  
Vol 2008 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-21
Author(s):  
Alvaro Souza Junior
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Oil And Gas Industry ◽  
Public Hearing ◽  
Gas Industry ◽  
Oil Platforms ◽  
Response Planning ◽  
National Environment ◽  
Oil Spill Response ◽  
Environmental Agencies

ABSTRACT In April 2002, the Brazilian National Environment Council (CONAMA) enacted Resolution 293, which defines the contents and requirements for oil spill response plans for ports, terminals, pipelines and oil platforms. CONAMA Resolution 293 was undoubtedly a landmark in the history of Brazilian planning and preparedness for oil spill accidents as long as it provided a technically consistent reference for elaboration of oil spill response plans based on the identification of spill sources, vulnerability analysis of potentially affected areas, and adequate response organization, procedures and resources. A clause of the Resolution required its review in 5 years after entering into force. To accomplish this requirement, the Ministry of Environment (MMA) opened a public hearing process to collect comments and suggestions for changes. One main contributor in this hearing process was the Brazilian Petroleum and Gas Institute (IBP), which represents the oil and gas industry. IBP created an internal workgroup which discussed proposals for changes in CONAMA Resolution 293 that were subsequently sent to MMA. After the public hearing process, MMA invited a number of institutions to join a workgroup to discuss the received comments and proposed changes. In general, these institutions were mostly the same which participated in the CONAMA Resolution 293 workgroup five years before: IBAMA (federal environmental agency), Maritime Authority, Ministry of Transportation, Ministry of Mines and Energy, AN? (oil & gas activities regulatory agency), IBP and some state environmental agencies. Proposed changes to CONAMA Resolution 293 were sent from the workgroup to one of the CONAMA technical chambers, which approved the proposal with minor amendments. The aim of this paper is to present and discuss the relevant changes in this regulation that will affect facility oil spill response plans in Brazil.

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.

An Application of Worst Case Scenario Concept in Oil Spill Response Planning for Offshore Drilling Operation in Brazil

2003 ◽  
Vol 2003 (1) ◽  
pp. 371-376 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hélder O. Ferreira ◽  
Alexandre Cabrai ◽  
Álvaro Souza Junior
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Competent Authority ◽  
Offshore Drilling ◽  
Case Scenario ◽  
Worst Case ◽  
Response Planning ◽  
Oil Spill Modeling ◽  
Oil Spill Response ◽  
Under Construction

ABSTRACT The Brazilian oil and gas E&P sector has been experiencing important changes since the end of the state monopoly in 1998. These changes include a new regulatory environment which is still under construction, in particular the requirements for environmental protection. In this context, Resolution 293 of Brazilian National Environmental Council (CONAMA) was enacted regulating Facility Response Plans for oil spill incidents. These plans, which should be approved by the competent authority, include a vulnerability analysis that should discuss the probability of oil reaching certain areas as well as the environmental sensitivity of these areas. Oil spill modeling is an important tool to estimating the areas likely to be affected by an oil spill. Although oil spill modeling is also part of the environmental studies required in the environmental permitting process for oil E&P activities, there are not well defined criteria to compose the oil spill scenarios to be modeled. In order to demonstrate the impacts of different approaches in the results of oil spill modeling, a case study is presented related to an offshore drilling activity.

Upgraded RETOS™: An International Tool to Assess Oil Spill Response Planning and Readiness

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 (1) ◽  
pp. 1353-1363 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elliott Taylor ◽  
Miguel Moyano ◽  
Alexis Steen
Keyword(s):  
Oil Spill ◽  
Best Management Practices ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Evaluation Tool ◽  
Readiness Assessment ◽  
Response Planning ◽  
Oil Spill Response

ABSTRACT In 2011 the Regional Association of Oil and Gas Companies - Latin America and the Caribbean (ARPEL) developed the “Oil Spill Response Planning and Readiness Assessment Manual” and its assessment tool, the “Readiness Evaluation Tool for Oil Spills (RETOS™)” with the support of regional and international experts from industry and government, including associations such as Clean Caribbean and Americas (CCA), RAC-REMPEITC-Carib, and IMO. The ARPEL Manual and RETOS™ provide a general guide for industry and governments to assess their level of oil spill response (OSR) planning and readiness management in relation to pre-established criteria. These criteria are commonly agreed upon by the institutions involved in the project and consider international best management practices. The foundation for the ARPEL Manual's concepts and criteria is the “Assessment of Oil Spill Response Capabilities: A Proposed International Guide for Oil Spill Response Planning and Readiness Assessment”, a guideline developed for the 2008 International Oil Spill Conference. RETOS™ adapts evaluation criteria according to the type of OSR program to be assessed.Seven different scopes from two perspectives (government and industry) are considered, including facilities, companies' business lines, and government national programs.For each scope there are three possible assessment levels for which OSR planning and readiness assessment criteria become increasingly more demanding.Each level contains criteria in 10 different categories (topic areas). Training workshops on RETOS™ were held during 2011 and 2012. Field tests were conducted by experts and surveys were conducted among users including companies, governments and consultants. Feedback from workshops and the practical application of RETOS™ provided recommendations for upgrades that were reviewed by ARPEL. Subsequently, a proposal to upgrade RETOS was made to the IOSC Executive Committee, which decided to support the endeavor. This paper describes the upgraded version of RETOS and its availability. The upgraded version of RETOS™ has garnered interest from several institutions that contributed to its completion as reviewers: a global Tier 3 organization (OSRL), Caspian and Black Sea's OSPRI, GI WACAF, and IPIECA. This multi-institutional review increased awareness of these readiness assessment tools, is expected to further expand worldwide awareness of the ARPEL Manual and RETOS™, and provides improved OSR planning and readiness management for industry and governments alike. A unique tool that is freely downloadable from the internet, the upgraded RETOS™ is being launched at the 2014 IOSC.

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.

Case Studies: Application of Oil Spill Response Good Practice Guides for Inland and Near-shore Operations

2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 (1) ◽  
pp. 2017254
Author(s):  
Amanda Hwa Ling Chee ◽  
Edelina Melisa ◽  
Xin Dong
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Planning Process ◽  
Good Practice ◽  
Health And Safety ◽  
Oil And Gas Industry ◽  
Near Shore ◽  
Oil Spill Response

Following key oil spill incidents in the Gulf of Mexico and Australia, the industry initiated a three-year Joint Industry Project to develop guidelines for oil spill preparedness and response management. These documents are commonly known as the Oil Spill Response JIP (OSR-JIP) Good Practice Guides. As the OSR-JIP originated from lessons learnt from offshore incidents, it is only natural that the industry would apply it with the same type of operation, hence the tendency to limit the practical application for inland or near-shore facilities. This paper presents two examples where the OSR-JIP guides are applied at downstream operations located inland and near-shore. The first study is on a refinery located near-shore with an operational jetty and a single buoy mooring. We started with a comprehensive review of their operations and updated their oil spill risk assessment profile in line with the framework described in the OSR-JIP Tiered Preparedness and Response. This process provided a reflection of their current capability and identified the gaps for further improvement. Following this, we proceeded to update the contingency plan using the OSR-JIP Contingency Planning to ensure that the risks identified are adequately mitigated with training of personnel and equipment selection. This exercise supported in improving the readiness of the facility to respond to oil spill incidents in future. The second study involves a terminal located inland that supplies refined products through a pipeline that leads towards a jetty on the coast. We developed several area specific tactical response plans that cover risks from their above-ground pipelines and at the jetty where loading and offloading of the products to tankers are conducted. To accurately define the suitable response technique, we started the planning process with an oil spill risk assessment following OSR-JIP Risk Assessment. The tactical response plans were then developed with reference to several other OSR-JIP guides such as OSR-JIP Inland Response and NEBA. The resulting plans describe health and safety concerns, identification of sensitive receptors, response techniques, location and quantity of resources, logistical requirements and timings and waste management. Based on these case studies, we demonstrated that the OSR-JIP guides can certainly be applied for inland and near-shore facilities and have a more far wider application for the whole oil and gas industry rather than be limited to offshore operations.

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).

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document