North Sea Oil & Gas A Scientific overview, the Elgin incident and the Environment

Martin PrestonHonorary Research FellowUniversity of LiverpoolThe Environmental Law Enforcement Conference, EDINBURGH 2013

North Sea Oil & Gas A Scientific overview, the Elgin incident and the Environment

1OverviewHistory of oil and gas spillsThe tensions in spill managementWhy the Gulf of Mexico spill and Elgin gas leak were differentDecommissioning in the North SeaThe international future the push to high latitudes and deep waters2What are oil and gas?Oil is formed by the heating of reservoirs of plant material over geological timesNatural gas chemically simpler - formation is much the same but involves heating of the material at higher temperaturesCrude oil is a very complex mixture of thousands of individual chemicals ranging from gases to tars. No two are identical - fingerprintsThe `recipe` of crude oils depends on region, oil field specific well and time3HistoryOil seeps known for several thousand years bitumen used to seal boats and containers, fix weapons to shafts, treat skin ailments and wounds and even in the preparation of Egyptian mummiesOne of the earliest shipments in 1539 when a barrel of crude was shipped from Venezuela to Spain to alleviate the gout of Emperor Charles V*Gas seeps used in Zoroastrian templesFirst refining by Gessner in 1846 in Nova Scotia produced kerosene. First refinery in Romania in 1856

Anibal Martinez (1969). Chronology of Venezuelan Oil. Purnell and Sons Ltd4HistoryWith the advent of the internal combustion engine demand soared

1 barrel = 160 litres5History European oil trafficNorth Sea production supply>demand6Largest tankers192816346 GRT and this size maintained until after WW21956Suez crisis meant ships needed to traverse Cape of Good Hope so much larger tankers were built1967Torrey Canyon 120000 DWT1979 Largest tanker >500000DWT could not transit English Channel since scrapped TodayLargest working tankers 441,500 DWTTanker size

World Oil Movements

Largest tanker spills

ITOPF 2013Tanker spills over time

All marine spills

Ixtoc 1Exxon ValdezTorrey Canyon 1967

Ekofisk Bravo 1977 North Sea

Eleni V 1978 North SeaAmoco Cadiz 1978 Brittany

Atlantic Empress 1979 Tobago

Ixtoc 1 1979 Gulf of Mexico

Ixtoc 1 1979480 000t

167 personnel killed with only 61 survivorsPiper Alpha 1988 North SeaPiper Alpha 1988 North Sea

A complex accident which led to a gas explosionOil to gas rig conversionPressure safety valve A removed for maintenanceKey paperwork missingFailure in B system led to switch back to A which was not gas-tightGas exploded

Worst accident to date

Memorial to Piper Alpha victims in Aberdeen

Exxon Valdez 1989

Gulf War 1991

Braer 1993 ShetlandDeepwater Horizon 2010

Deepwater Horizon 2010

Elgin 2012 North Sea

You are herehttp://bcove.me/0ejf9rwz

The ingredients of bad accidentsThe 4 damage factorsWhat is it?Where is it?How much of it is there?What time of year/weather is it/Recovery factorsTemperatureFlushing characteristicsUniqueness of damage siteReproductive strategy of endemic organismsMarginality of key species30Exxon ValdezNot in top 20 of big spills But probably the most damaging spill of all timeAvoidable accidentPristine, high latitude environmentBad weather at key momentsBadly handled response poor planning and implementationTensions in Accident ManagementIndustrial/corporateSocial/economic perceived risk vs actual riskPolitical the need to be seen to be doing somethingLegalEnvironmentalMediaScientificConflictMedia desperate for new storiesPresident Obama a man with authority but no power in this instance faced with mid-term electionsScientists trying to get reliable field dataBP trying to stop spill under oversight of official US administration and manage PR with real time video coverageLocal concerns about fishing and tourism i.e. economyLawyers keen to develop compensation claims. Local politicians having their sayThe fishing and tourism industries had different imperatives. Fisheries were closed so they needed compensation and had some interests in maximising the problem.The tourist industry was desperate to minimise the problem so as to get people visiting againObama needed to show that he was the man in charge but in reality there was nothing much he could do. In this region there is also the memory of Hurricane Katrina and the poor initial response of the Bush administration.

He was also, even at this stage, concerned about the mid-term elections.

Use of British Petroleum rather than BP stoked tensions between US and UK

The irony is that if this had happened to a US drilling company he would almost certainly needed to call BP in as consultants to fix the problemThe US legal system seems to encourage compensation claims so there is an incentive for lawyers need to maximise the worst case and scare people into signing up with them. Local politicians have to reflect the concerns of their electorates (and many of them in this area are also republicans so no inclination to support Obama)Scientists are scampering around the edges of all this trying to get ship time and equipment but caught in the bind of not knowing whether to accept research money from BP. I did a lot of media work over this period and I was always asked whether I had taken oil company money (or belonged to an NGO) before they would go ahead.And through it all the media are frantically trying to find a new story to keep the cameras rolling. A long incident is quite difficult for news media because they can end up running out of new things to say. The tendency can be to ramp up the hype to try and keep peoples attention. For an objective scientist asked to comment this can be a particular problem.33Elgin - minimal conflictElgin accident was well managed rapid evacuation of personnel effective therefore no Piper AlphaInformation flow was slow and press conferences given in FrenchSite was inaccessible and cloud covered so no picturesAll appropriate actions taken with minimum fuss and maximum effectivenessWhether accident could have been completely avoided is unclearDecommissioningOSPAR Rules Offshore Installations1998 OSPAR Ministerial Meeting, the dumping, and leaving wholly or partly in place, of disused offshore installations is prohibited within the maritime areaSome exceptions (e.g. for steel installations weighing more than ten thousand tonnes in air or gravity based concrete)

http://www.ospar.org/

According to the latest update of the inventory, 145 installations have been decommissioned. Offshore structures in OSPARCOM areaPipelines?Brent Spar

Brent Spar Shell 1995+

NGO intervention led to cancellation of dumping plans and subsequent recycling in Norway

However Greenpeace did not come out unscathed when their data was faultyFate of decommissioned structures

Benefits through presence alone500m exclusion zone1284 still in commissionEquivalent to ~1000km2Area of North Sea 750000km2So ~.13% in exclusion zonesPossible benefits of non-removalExclusion zones maintainedDrill cuttings undisturbedAlternative usesCentres for offshore energy generation wind/wave?Desalination using solar powerFish farmsSeal observation platform (German)

See Royal Academy of Engineering Report http://www.raeng.org.uk/news/publications/list/reports/RAEng_Offshore%20_Decommissioning_Report.PDFCarbon capture and storage CCSCurrently most interesting optionCO2 from industrial processes/power generation captured and injected into aquifers/spent gas reservoirsThis reduces CO2 emissions to atmosphere and influences global warmingNorwegians/Statoil already using Sleipner field has reduced emissions by 106 tonnes over 10 yearsAround 6 UK projects in progress. First online ~2015/16?The FutureShale gas versus offshore gas?Oil/gas price versus recovery costs?CCS as a tool in managing climate changeDeeper colder more remoteInternational versus national waters Territorial disputes e.g. ArcticHigh risk areas for shipping accidents

Major losses

ConclusionsAccidents have become less frequentBoth real and perceived damage can be minimised by proper planning, preparation and executionThe future of North Sea activities will be determined byPrice of hydrocarbon extrationObsolescence and decommissioningAlternative activities including energy generation and CCSThe threat of accidents is moving to high latitudes, deep waters and (potentially) the far East.