A new roadmap for quantitative methodologies of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is proposed, using an ecosystem-based approach. EIA recommendations are currently based on case-by-case rankings, distant from statistical methodologies, and based on ecological ideas that lack proof of generality or predictive capacities. These qualitative approaches ignore process dynamics, scales of variations and interdependencies and are unable to address societal demands to link socio-economic and ecological processes (e.g. population dynamics). We propose to re-focus EIA around the systemic formulation of interactions between organisms (organized in populations and communities) and their environments but inserted within a strict statistical framework. A systemic formulation allows scenarios to be built that simulate impacts on chosen receptors. To illustrate the approach, we design a minimum ecosystem model that demonstrates non-trivial effects and complex responses to environmental changes. We suggest further that an Ecosystem-Based EIA - in which the socio-economic system is an evolving driver of the ecological one - is more promising than a socio-economic-ecological system where all variables are treated as equal. This refocuses the debate on cause-and-effect, processes, identification of essential portable variables, and a potential for quantitative comparisons between projects, which is important in cumulative effects determinations.
Oilfield service companies face unique challenges when taking research and development (R&D) concepts into the design and implementation phase for use under various regulatory regimes around the world. For example, what can be discharged in one country may not be allowed in another country. More typically, the answer to the question of whether a potential discharge or emission is acceptable or not from a regulatory perspective is not "black or white" (i.e., conclusive). Rather, an evaluation of the proposed discharge or emission may have to be performed considering the specifics of the discharge (rate, toxicity, etc.) and the receiving environment relative to a broad framework for regulatory acceptance (e.g., within an operating permit, environmental impact assessment process, etc.). Finally, the authority to discharge does not typically rest with the oilfield service company itself, but with the Operator. The paper emphasizes that technology developers must first recognize the challenges facing future use of their equipment in various regulatory regimes. To address such challenges, this paper then describes an approach to evaluating the regulatory framework and the potential acceptance of a discharge or emission source, thereby limiting the technology developer's uncertainty with respect to continuing the expensive R&D process. Use of the approach, illustrated through examples, facilitates decisions that need to be made during the initial design and development phase of new oilfield technologies.
As the governments of developing nations strive to increase indigenous expertise in offshore oil exploration and development, the industry is also dealing with offshore concession (or lease) expirations on older fields that are to revert back to operation by national oil companies for the remainder of the life of the field. Unlike onshore developments, for which property transfer (or asset divestiture) due diligence protocols have been developed (E&P Forum 1996), few if any industry protocols address environmental risk management for the transfer of offshore facilities. Additionally, the longer-term operation of offshore facilities, from equipment/facility integrity, sustainability, and impacts to the environment during the transition period, needs to be considered by the divesting entity, such that national oil company operators have a clear understanding of the development and its future operation. This paper presents property transfer practices developed for offshore/subsea environmental sampling, including sampling design/program development, sampling protocol, and lessons learned from the implementation of such a sampling program. Additionally, a model for performing a property transfer Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) for an offshore development consisting of a wide range of facilities including well jackets, processing platforms, and accommodations platforms is presented. The results of the environmental sampling and property transfer Phase 1 ESA then provide a baseline to protect the original operator from future claims of subsea pollution or unacceptable environmental operating practices. Alternatively, if subsea pollution is identified, best management practices or safeguards protective of human health and the environment (e.g., fishing restrictions) can be implemented. Introduction The last 20 years have seen significant advancement in environmental controls associated with oil production. New technologies have emerged that have lessened environmental impacts, and new information regarding the impacts of certain activities has helped drive environmental policy and regulations. As a result, current environmental expectations associated with an older oil producing field are in many respects greater than they were when the field was originally developed, as well as during different periods in the life of production. For onshore developments, investigations and/or remedial actions have been taken in many fields to remove or minimize environmental impacts associated with past practices. However, it is more difficult to identify environmental impacts of past practices in the marine environment. The marine environment is dynamic, so it is difficult to imagine the impacts of drilling, produced water discharges, etc., after decades of operation. Additionally, visual inspections are not easily performed and even with subsea cameras, colors and patterns are often difficult to see. However, in some cases residual impacts occur, and it is becoming increasingly important to understand those impacts, especially in a property transfer situation. The two main steps associated with transferring an offshore property are performance of a property transfer Phase 1 ESA and Environmental Sampling (the sampling could be compared to a Phase 2 ESA, though the scope and logistics are different). These two steps are described below.
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.