Net Environmental Benefit Analysis support Tool to Assess Oil Spill Response Technologies and the Environmental Effects of Arctic Oil Spills

Transcription

1 Net Environmental Benefit Analysis support Tool to Assess Oil Spill Response Technologies and the Environmental Effects of Arctic Oil Spills Lionel Camus & Stig Falk-Petersen, Akvaplan-niva Jack Word, Rambøll/Environ Robbert Jak, IMARES Stephane LeFloch, Cedre

2 Content Environmental issues Net Environmental Benefit Analysis-NEBA Project scope

3 Risk for oil pollution in the Arctic

4 Solutions to mitigate an oil spill Chemical dispersant In situ burning Chemical herders Mechanical recovery Natural attenuation

5 What habitat & species to protect? Atmosph ere Shoreline Pelagic Realm Transition al Ice Seabird Benthic Community

6 Environmental Compartments Compartment assessment has been divided into 6 major categories for the Arctic: 1) Atmosphere or Sea-Surface 2) Ice 3) Water Convergence Zones 4) Pelagic Waters 5) Sediment/Shorelines 6) Hard Substrate or Areas of Special Biological Significance

7 Valuable Ecosystem Component Factors 1. Numerically abundant prey resources critical to one or more food webs associated with EC 2. A key component supporting food sources used by subsistence harvesters 3. Similarly exposed to various oil spill response substances, 4. Taxa or populations concentrated to critical levels seasonally within an EC (e.g., for feeding, breeding, resting), may be seasonal occupation 5. Taxa that create habitat used by other Arctic species (e.g., ice algae, hard and soft corals) 6. Species that represent a functional role (e.g. bioturbation, scavenging, oil or gas utilizers) 7. Species that can be studied in the field or laboratory for individual responses that can represent rare or large species 8. Unique species or those with population sizes already at risk

8 What is the best response option? & How to take the best decision? Need to produce knowledge to support a Net Environmental Benefit Analysis

9 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.

10 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

11 Main Project coordinator Project 2A: Resilience and sensitivity of Arctic species Project 2B: Oil weathering and biodegradation Project C Population consequences, acute vs. chronic effects Project 1 NEBA tool

12 International partners Akvaplan-niva, IRIS, NORUT & the University of Tromsø (Norway) CEDRE (France) IMARES, Wageningen University & Radboud University Nijmegen (Netherlands) Environ/Rambøll the University of Laval (Canada) Bigelow Laboratories (USA) COWI and the Denmark Technical University (Denmark) PINRO (Russia)

13 Desk work: Arctic Ecology & modelling 1. Dynamic & Timing 3. Modelling impact 2. Oil fate/mass balance

14 Field work: to study impact of oil and response on ice ecosystem

15 Field site Van MijenFjorden

16 Treatments

17

18 Sampling strategy in the mesocosm

19 X cm X cm 10 cm Ice core sampling Oil chemistry Conductivity Nutrients Photo Temperature of core sections Weather information Bacterial DNA/RNA Bacterial production PAH mineralization Primary production Pigments (HPLC) Chlorophyll/Phaeo. Protist composition Virus abundance

20 Oil weathering and biodegradation in sediment and rocky shore Sediment bags on the shore with different treatments Rock tile with oil

21 Laboratory: effect of chemically dispersed oil and residues of burnt oil on fish and zooplankton

22 Environmental Compartment VEC Attributes within EC for Chemical Dispersant Response Action - DRAFT VEC Examples Exposure Type (MOA) Fouling Exposure Potential Respirator y contact Acute Conta ct Sensitivity of Taxa CBB F RC AC CBB Resiliency Biodegradation Potential Atmosphere Mammals and seabirds R Air Water Interface Layers (SML) Ice Water Interface Layers (IWL) Pelagic Deep Pelagic Sediment Polyna Mammals, seabirds, neustonic species and life stages Mammals, seabirds F, R, AC F, R, AC, CBB Annual Spring bloom species AC, CBB Multi year <10m >10m >100m >1000m Intertidal <10m <100m None Low Unknown 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 Low Low to high Low Moderate Ice algae communities F, AC, CBB Unknown Low Copepods, krill, mammals, seabirds Copepods, krill, fish, marine mammals, seabirds Arctic cod, pelagic fish, invertebrates, marine mammals Midwater fish and invertebrates Bivalves, crabs, mammals, seabirds Estuarine species, fishery species, mammals, seabirds Bivalves, crabs, mammals, seabirds F, AC, CBB AC, CBB CBB Low Low to High Low to High Low to High CBB Moderate NA F, R, AC, CBB AC, CBB Low to High Low to High AC, CBB Moderate NA >1000m Deep water species AC, CBB Low NA Undefined Post volatilization - low Low Moderate NA NA Low, repeat exposure likely Moderate

23 VEC Attributes within EC for IN SITU BURNING Response Action - DRAFT Environmental Compartment VEC Examples Exposure Type (MOA) Fouling Exposure Potential Respirator y contact Acute Conta ct Sensitivity of Taxa CBB F RC AC CBB Resiliency Biodegradation Potential Atmosphere Mammals and seabirds R Low Undefined Air Water Interface Layers (SML) Ice Water Interface Layers (IWL) Pelagic Deep Pelagic Sediment Polyna Mammals, seabirds, neustonic species and life stages Mammals, seabirds 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 F, R, AC Low to high F, R, AC, CBB Annual Spring bloom species AC, CBB Multi year <10m >10m >100m >1000 m Intertid al <10m <100m >1000 m Ice algae communities Copepods, krill, mammals, seabirds Copepods, krill, fish, marine mammals, seabirds Arctic cod, pelagic fish, invertebrates, marine mammals Midwater fish and invertebrates Bivalves, crabs, mammals, seabirds Estuarine species, fishery species, mammals, seabirds Bivalves, crabs, mammals, seabirds F, AC, CBB None Unknown Low Moderate Unknown F, AC, CBB Low to High AC, CBB CBB CBB F, R, AC, CBB AC, CBB Low to High Low to High Moderate Low to High Low to High AC, CBB Moderate NA Deep water species AC, CBB Low NA Post volatilization - low Low Low Moderate NA NA NA Low, repeat exposure likely Moderate

24 Thank you Follow the project on: