A quantitative approach to assess environmental risks from offshore petroleum activities is developed in this paper. Taking into account both reservoir- and project-specific data, different kinds of oil spill scenarios are analyzed. Oil characteristics and weathering properties are incorporated in a standardized geographical information system (GIS)-based oil spill modeling system, simulating oil trajectories based on wind and current data. Mapping of environmental resources is combined with a sensitivity evaluation and protection value classification. Nationally accepted criteria in Norway for identification of valued ecosystem components (VECs) are adopted to select a limited number of high priority risk indicators. Oil spill statistics are combined with occurrences of VEC resources on a seasonal basis. Oil pollution effect and damage keys have been established based on past oil spill incidents and scientific documentation. Impact assessments are based on available specific resource data and provide results related to the recovery potential of each resource component included. The recovery time is adopted as a general stand-alone parameter that allows classification of severity and ecological significance of acute oil pollution incidents. Quantitative risk results are used to describe and rank environmental risks issued from different sources and scenarios, covering different seasons and activity plans. The ranking also is used to identify high priority resources and geographic areas for contingency actions. The variability in presence and vulnerability of natural resources gives the operator the possibility of adjusting activity plans according to the time-window providing the lowest environmental risk. Contingency plans can be designed for and focused on periods or geographic areas with increased risk. The results are further used in combination with oil spill statistics to determine specific requirements for oil spill contingency systems. Requirements for key factors—such as response time, equipment, functional capability, and efficiency with respect to weather, oil type, and oil quantity—also are established. The overall efficiency of contingency systems is assessed and the risk reanalyzed to identify the potential for risk reduction. Further developments are proposed advising that risk reduction should be considered in combination with costs involved in investments, maintenance and exercises, as well as real combat action costs and compensation costs. Cost-benefit could then be assessed for different contingency arrangements, providing a basis for selection of optimal solutions for contingency systems according to the ALARP principle—“as low as reasonably practicable”—where costs of countermeasures are weighted against potential risk reduction.
Traditionally, the environmental risk assessment (ERA) has been limited to discharge probabilities with a qualitative description of potential environmental impact. This paper presents an ERA methodology which introduces algorithms for quantification of environmental damage which can be directly evaluated against well defined acceptance criteria. Moreover, the methodology includes three levels which are constructed so that more conservative risk estimates are obtained the less data and knowledge that are applied in the analysis. The same acceptance criteria are applied for all three levels. The presented methodology is limited to assessments of acute oil discharges in relation to ecological components. Aesthetical and economical components are not included. Introduction Norwegian legislation requires that the offshore petroleum operators define acceptance criteria for the risks in their offshore activities. Such criteria are required to be defined for human safety as well as environmental impact. Further, the legislation requires that a risk assessment has to be carried out in order to evaluate whether the acceptance criteria are met or not. This requirement for environmental risk assessment is a new practice in risk management and define needs for practical and quantitative methods. The legislation as defined today is directed towards assessing the probability for environmental damage in particularly sensitive areas. The presented methodology focus on particularly valued and sensitive environmental components. Damage Classification A major problem in environmental risk analysis is to define a taxonomy for quantification of damage to the range of environmental components. The presented methodology is limited to assessments of acute oil discharges in relation to ecological components. Effects on human health and aesthetical and economical components are not included. The ecological components are assessed on a population or community/habitat level. For a given oil contamination, they may experience unwanted effects (acute mortality, reduced reproduction, decreased biodiversity, habitat loss) to a given extent (fraction of population affected, length or area of coastal zone contaminated). Experience from earlier oil spills has shown that most ecological components will start the restitution process after the incident. The time period until the component is back to a healthy pre-spill level or a new stable situation (e.g. new carrying capacity) is referred to as the restitution time. The restitution time will depend on the environmental component considered and the magnitude and extent of the effects. The restitution time is used as an expression for the damage to environmental components considered. Five damage categories are defined and presented in Table 1. The range for the damage categories shown in Table 1 has been defined to cover the range of restitution times seen after historical spills. Acceptance Criteria The risk acceptance criteria are defined by the industry itself. The criteria are given by means of upper frequency limits for the defined damage categories. Acceptance criteria may be related to fields, installations and operations. Restitution time as consequence parameter forms a rational basis for the development of such criteria. The acceptance criteria may be presented in a consequence-frequency matrix as shown by the example in Fig. 1. In the area between intolerable and negligible risk, risk reduction means may be implemented to reduce the risk to As Low As Reasonable Possible (ALARP). P. 137^
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.