Transcript PPTX - 11,6 MB

The oil and gas activities in the Arctic
Environmental issues and solutions
Lionel Camus & Salve Dahle
Akvaplan-niva
© www.akvaplan.niva.no
Content
• Environmental issues
• Net Environmental Benefit Analysis-NEBA
• Environmental Effects of Arctic Oil Spills and
Arctic Spill Response Technologies-OGP
© www.akvaplan.niva.no
© www.akvaplan.niva.no
Risk for oil pollution in the Arctic
65,000 tourists on cruise ship in 2010 in Svalbard
© www.akvaplan.niva.no
Solutions to mitigate an oil spill
• Chemical dispersant
• In situ burning
• Chemical herders
• Mechanical recovery
• Natural attenuation
© www.akvaplan.niva.no
What habitat & species to protect?
Atmosph
ere
Shoreline
Pelagic
Realm
Seabird
Transition
al Ice
Benthic
Community
What is the best response option?
&
How to take the best decision?
Need to produce knowledge to support
a Net Environmental Benefit Analysis
© www.akvaplan.niva.no
NEBA
• NEBA is an internationally recognised methodology
• Pan Arctic understanding!
• NEBA: the gains in value of environmental services
attained by the action(s) minus the value of
adverse environmental effects caused by the
action(s).
• Goal of NEBA: balancing risks, benefits and tradeoffs between competing management alternatives.
© www.akvaplan.niva.no
The OGP Arctic Oil Spill Response
Technology – Joint Industry Programme
Shell, Total, ExxonMobile, Conocophillips, Chevron, BP, ENI, Statoil, North
Caspian Operating Company, GazpromNeft
the JIP will carry out a series of advanced research
projects on six key areas of research:
-dispersants
-environmental effects (NEBA)
-trajectory modelling
-remote sensing
-mechanical recovery
-in situ burning
www.arcticresponsetechnology.org
© www.akvaplan.niva.no
The Artic JIP OGP project
• Phase 1: literature review, state of the art, gaps of
knowledge. 2012-2013
• Phase 2: Research project, field/lab/desk,
fabrication of the NEBA support tool. 2014-2017
• Phase 3: Operational testing phase. 2017
© www.akvaplan.niva.no
Arctic Oil Spill Response Technology – JIP
Environmental Effects of Arctic Oil Spills
and
Arctic Spill Response Technologies
Shell, Total, ExxonMobile, Conocophillips, Chevron, BP, ENI, Statoil, North
Caspian Operating Company, GazpromNeft
Project coordinator: Lionel Camus, Akvaplan-Niva
(Norway)
Main Project coordinator
Project 2A:
Resilience and
sensitivity of Arctic
species
Project 2B:
Oil weathering
and
biodegradation
Project 1
NEBA tool
Project C
Population
consequences,
acute vs.
chronic effects
International partners
• Akvaplan-niva, IRIS, NORUT, The Norwegian Polar
Institute & the University of Tromsø (Norway)
• CEDRE (France)
• IMARES, Wageningen University & Radboud University
Nijmegen (Netherlands)
• the University of Laval (Canada)
• Bigelow Laboratories (USA)
• COWI and the Denmark Technical University (Denmark)
• PINRO (Russia)
Desk work: Arctic Ecology & modelling
1. Dynamic & Timing
3. Modelling impact
2. Oil fate/mass balance
© www.akvaplan.niva.no
Field work: to study impact of oil and response on
ice ecosystem
© www.akvaplan.niva.no
Field site
Van MijenFjorden
Treatments
© www.akvaplan.niva.no
© www.akvaplan.niva.no
Sampling strategy in the mesocosm
3
14
15
9
6
18
10
12
19
1
7
2
4
16
13
8
11
17
5
© www.akvaplan.niva.no
Ice core
sampling
X cm
Oil chemistry
Conductivity
Nutrients
Bacterial DNA/RNA
Bacterial production
PAH mineralization
Primary production
X cm
Pigments (HPLC)
Chlorophyll/Phaeo.
Protist composition
10 cm
Virus abundance
 Photo
 Temperature of core sections
 Weather information
Laboratory: effect of chemically dispersed oil and
residues of burnt oil on fish and zooplankton
Photo: Peter Leopold
© www.akvaplan.niva.no
Project 2A:
Resilience and
sensitivity of Arctic
species
Project 2B:
Oil weathering
and
biodegradation
Project 1
NEBA tool
Project 3
Population
consequence
s, acute vs.
chronic
effects
VEC Attributes within EC for Chemical Dispersant Response Action - DRAFT
Mammals and seabirds
R
Air Water Interface
Layers (SML)
Mammals, seabirds,
neustonic species and life
stages
F, R, AC
Ice Water
Interface Layers
(IWL)
Polyna
Mammals, seabirds
F, R, AC,
CBB
Annual
Spring bloom species
AC, CBB
Multi
year
Ice algae communities
F, AC, CBB
<10m
Copepods, krill, mammals,
seabirds
F, AC, CBB
>10m
Copepods, krill, fish, marine
mammals, seabirds
AC, CBB
>100m
Arctic cod, pelagic fish,
invertebrates, marine
mammals
CBB
>1000m
Midwater fish and
invertebrates
CBB
Intertidal
Bivalves, crabs, mammals,
seabirds
F, R, AC,
CBB
<10m
Estuarine species, fishery
species, mammals, seabirds
AC, CBB
<100m
Bivalves, crabs, mammals,
seabirds
AC, CBB
>1000m
Deep water species
AC, CBB
Sediment
Exposure Potential
Fouling
Respirator
y contact
Acute
Conta
ct
Sensitivity of Taxa
CBB
F
Unknown
Low
None
Low
RC
AC
Resiliency
Biodegradation
Potential
Low
Undefined
CBB
SENITIVITIES APPEAR TO BE THE SAME AMONG SPECIES FOR BOTH ACUTE
CONTACT AND UPTAKE AND CRITICL BODY BURDEN ASSESSMENTS FOR
INVERTEBRATE AND FISH – LESS IS KNOWN ABOUT MAMMALS AND SEABIRD
RESPONSES TO PETROLEUM CONTAMINANTS
Atmosphere
Deep Pelagic
VEC Examples
Pelagic
Exposure
Type
(MOA)
Environmental
Compartment
Low to high
Post volatilization low
Low
Moderate
Low
Unknown
Low
Low to
High
Moderate
Low to
High
NA
Low to
High
NA
Moderate
NA
Low to
High
Low, repeat
exposure likely
Low to
High
Moderate
Moderate
NA
Low
NA
VEC Attributes within EC for IN SITU BURNING Response Action - DRAFT
R
Air Water Interface
Layers (SML)
Mammals, seabirds, neustonic
species and life stages
F, R, AC
Ice Water
Interface Layers
(IWL)
Polyna
Mammals, seabirds
F, R, AC,
CBB
Annual
Spring bloom species
AC, CBB
Multi
year
Ice algae communities
F, AC, CBB
<10m
Copepods, krill, mammals,
seabirds
F, AC, CBB
>10m
Copepods, krill, fish, marine
mammals, seabirds
AC, CBB
>100m
Arctic cod, pelagic fish,
invertebrates, marine
mammals
CBB
>1000
m
Midwater fish and
invertebrates
CBB
Intertid
al
Bivalves, crabs, mammals,
seabirds
F, R, AC,
CBB
<10m
Estuarine species, fishery
species, mammals, seabirds
AC, CBB
<100m
Bivalves, crabs, mammals,
seabirds
AC, CBB
>1000
m
Deep water species
AC, CBB
Sediment
Fouling
Respirator
y contact
Acute
Conta
ct
Sensitivity of Taxa
CBB
F
None
RC
AC
Resiliency
Biodegradation
Potential
Low
Undefined
CBB
SENITIVITIES APPEAR TO BE THE SAME AMONG SPECIES FOR BOTH ACUTE
CONTACT AND UPTAKE AND CRITICL BODY BURDEN ASSESSMENTS FOR
INVERTEBRATE AND FISH – LESS IS KNOWN ABOUT MAMMALS AND SEABIRD
RESPONSES TO PETROLEUM CONTAMINANTS
Mammals and seabirds
Exposure Potential
Unknown
Atmosphere
Deep Pelagic
VEC Examples
Pelagic
Exposure
Type
(MOA)
Environmental
Compartment
Low to high
Low
Post volatilization low
Moderate
Low
Unknown
Low
Low to
High
Moderate
Low to
High
NA
Low to
High
NA
Moderate
NA
Low to
High
Low, repeat
exposure likely
Low to
High
Moderate
Moderate
NA
Low
NA
Thank you
Follow the project on:
www.arcticresponsetechnology.org