Abstract-The results from the screening toxicity tests Artemia salina, Microtox, and Mitochondria RET test were compared with those obtained from OSPAR (Oslo and Paris Commissions)-authorized procedures for testing of offshore chemicals (Skeletonema costatum, Acartia tonsa, Abra alba, and Corophium volutator). In this study 82 test substances (26 non-water soluble) were included. The Microtox test was found to be the most sensitive of the three screening tests. Microtox and Mitochondria RET test results showed good correlation with results from Acartia and Skeletonema testing, and it was concluded that the Microtox test was a suitable screening test as a base for assessment of further testing, especially regarding water-soluble chemicals. Sensitivity of Artemia salina to the tested chemicals was too low for it to be an appropriate bioassay organism for screening testing. A very good correlation was found between the results obtained with the Skeletonema and Acartia tests. The results indicated no need for more than one of the Skeletonema or Acartia tests if the Skeletonema median effective concentration or Acartia median lethal concentration was greater than 200 mg/L. The sediment-reworker tests (A. alba or C. volutator) for chemicals that are likely to end up in the sediments (non-water soluble or surfactants) should be performed, independent of results from screening tests and other OSPAR species.
The results from the screening toxicity tests Artemia salina, Microtox®, and Mitochondria RET test were compared with those obtained from OSPAR (Oslo and Paris Commissions)‐authorized procedures for testing of offshore chemicals (Skeletonema costatum, Acartia tonsa, Abra alba, and Corophium volutator). In this study 82 test substances (26 non‐water soluble) were included. The Microtox test was found to be the most sensitive of the three screening tests. Microtox and Mitochondria RET test results showed good correlation with results from Acartia and Skeletonema testing, and it was concluded that the Microtox test was a suitable screening test as a base for assessment of further testing, especially regarding water‐soluble chemicals. Sensitivity of Artemia salina to the tested chemicals was too low for it to be an appropriate bioassay organism for screening testing. A very good correlation was found between the results obtained with the Skeletonema and Acartia tests. The results indicated no need for more than one of the Skeletonema or Acartia tests if the Skeletonema median effective concentration or Acartia median lethal concentration was greater than 200 mg/L. The sediment‐reworker tests (A. alba or C. volutator) for chemicals that are likely to end up in the sediments (non‐water soluble or surfactants) should be performed, independent of results from screening tests and other OSPAR species.
This paper presents the initial results of a research project initiated by Conoco Norway, Inc. (CNI) late in 1989. The objective of the project is to develop a screening protocol for determining the potential environmental impacts of five types of chemicals typically used in offshore oil and gas production operations in the North Sea. The protocol includes tests for determination of bioaccumulation potential, oil-water distribution factor, biodegradation potential, and toxicity. When fully developed, the protocol represents one possible approach to implementing the proposed PARCOM standard testing program. Only the results for the bioaccumulation potential and oil-water distribution factor are presented here. For determination of bioaccumulation potential, the High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) is recommended. The oil-water distribution factor can be determined by surrogate parameters as total organic carbon (TOC), UV-absorption or gas chromatography (GC). This factor is critical in sample preparation and evaluation of the environmental fate and effect of oilfield chemicals. Both acute and chronic toxicity should be taken into consideration for evaluation of toxicity. The ratio between the highest likely concentration of the chemical in the environment (Potential Environmental Concentrations - PEC) and the lowest concentration, at which harmful effects are likely to be observed (Minimum Adverse Effect Concentration - MAEC) gives the size of the apparent margin of safety.
No abstract
This paper gives a demonstration of environmental risk analysis and risk management by use of the CHARM (Chemical Hazard Assessment and Risk Management) model for making cost/environmental benefit evaluations of produced water handling. The BP operated Ula field in the North Sea is used as a demonstration case. The CHARM model is developed by Aquateam, Norway and TNO in the Netherlands on behalf of the oil operators, chemical suppliers, and environmental authorities in the North Sea countries. The CHARM model has been discussed and is accepted by the Oslo and Paris Commission (OSPAR). The environmental risk analysis demonstrated in this paper covers evaluation of the environmental impact of the produced water discharges, including chemicals and natural constituents from the Ula platform. The environmental risk analysis was performed for various environmental management options. Two options were elaborated for comparison to a reference situation. The Ula produced water constituents demonstrated variable contributions to the total environmental risk. The environmental risk was slightly reduced by improved water treatment, but the most significant reduction was seen for the option of produced water reinjection (PWRI). PWRI reduced the produced water discharges with 90%, indicating that the environmental benefit was superior. PWRI was also able to compete economically with the other options. It should be noticed that the PWRI option did not reduce the production capacity at Ula. If so, the economic situation would have been significantly different. Introduction The produced water discharges to the North Sea are steadily increasing as the oil producing fields are becoming more mature. The discharges were 187 million m3 in 1993 and are expected to culminate at a level of 340 million m3 in 19971. As the oilfields mature, the produced water volumes will increase, more chemicals will be used, and hence, the environmental risks related to produced water discharges will increase. The environmental risk can be reduced by choosing less harmful chemicals, improving the water treatment, reinjecting the produced water or selecting alternative (e.g. corrosion resistant) materials. These choices are, however, not always clear cut. Which option is the better for the environment and to which cost? The optimum choice will, however, be site specific. Traditionally, risk is a product of consequences and probability. The use of risk analysis within safety management has been applied for a long time. This method has recently also been introduced in the environmental field for evaluation of environmental risk of acute incidents in Norway. In the offshore industry, environmental risk analysis is normally associated with accidental oil spills. The environmental risk discussed in this paper is, however, related to continuous discharges of produced water and includes the combined risk of residual chemicals and oil as well as natural organic and inorganic constituents in the produced water. P. 473
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.
hi@scite.ai
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.