No abstract

Abstract:The increasing pressure on the earth's resources due to population growth requires that development and resource use be managed to maintain a sustainable environment so as to preserve or enhance human well-being. A practical approach for demonstrating the environmental sustainability of an action (e.g

Taxpayers and operators worldwide have significant current liabilities associated with decommissioning of offshore Oil & Gas (O&G) assets. Consequently, decommissioning is at the forefront of industrial, governmental, and non-governmental agendas. Decommissioning is a highly complex activity with health, safety, environmental, social, economic, and technical implications. Increasing scientific evidence supports that manmade subsea structures create hard, artificial reef habitats that provide ecological and social benefits to society. Given the significant uncertainty regarding how subsea structures should be retired at the end of their operational lifetimes, it is necessary for governments, taxpayers, and operators to understand the risks and benefits associated with potential decommissioning options. Currently, the North Sea decommissioning process is based on the policies and direction of the Oslo and Paris Convention’s (OSPAR) Decision 98/3 and follow comparative assessment (CA) multiple-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) guidelines to determine the best overall strategy for decommissioning subsea structures; however, CA MCDA processes can be biased, ambiguous, difficult to use, interpret, and replicate, and limited in their consideration of multigenerational benefits. Consequently, to assist decision-makers in understanding and evaluating options and associated benefits for decommissioning subsea structures, this study adapted the net environmental benefit analysis (NEBA) framework to supplement and strengthen the CA process for evaluating decommissioning options for offshore O&G facilities. The net environmental benefit analysis based comparative assessment (NEBA-CA) framework is presented that addresses the growing need for a practical, quantitative, scientifically robust, defendable, and transparent MCDA approach to determine optimized decommissioning strategies for subsea assets. Increased transparency in CAs will provide an additional layer of credibility with regulators and society. The approach is data driven and a desktop analysis mainly relying on existing data. Using a North Sea case study, this work demonstrates the ability of NEBA-CA to resolve inherent complexity in comparing decommissioning options, thereby supporting operators in working with regulators to decommission assets in a way that maximizes ecosystem service benefits to society while managing site-related risks and costs. The NEBA-CA framework supplements and strengthens the standard CA process by 1) incorporating quantified metrics including multigenerational ecosystem service benefits and risks, 2) excluding front ranking (scoring) or weighting of metrics, and 3) providing consistent graphical displays to support visual differentiation of options and metrics.

Ecosystems provide the conditions for producing food, regulating water, and providing wildlife habitats; these, among others, are known as ecosystem services (ESs). Food production is both economically and culturally important to southern European farmers, particularly in Italy where farmers grow flavorsome tomatoes with passion and pride. Growers rely on pesticides for crop protection, the potential environmental impact of which is often questioned by regulators and other stakeholders. The European regulatory system for the approval of pesticides includes a thorough evaluation of risks to the environment and is designed to be protective of ecosystems. The consideration of ESs in environmental decision making is a growing trend, and the present case study provides an example of how ESs evaluation could be used to enhance agricultural practices and regulatory policy for crop protection. By attacking plant roots, nematodes may affect the growth and yield of fruit and vegetable crops, and the income earned by farmers at harvest time. Available solutions include chemical treatments such as 1,3-dichloropropene (1,3-D), physical treatments (solarization), and biological treatments (biofumigation). In order to characterize the risks and benefits associated with the use of 1,3-D in crop protection, ESs and socioeconomic analyses were applied to its use in the control of nematodes in tomato cultivation in southern Italy. The present study confirmed the benefits of 1,3-D to tomato production in Italy, with significant positive effects on production yields and farm income when compared to limited and transient potential impacts on services such as soil function. It was confirmed that 1,3-D allows farm income to be maintained and secures tomato production in these regions for the future. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2016;12:801-810. © 2016 SETAC.

No abstract