Responding to Oil Spills in the
U.S. Arctic Marine Environment
Lee Majors
May 21, 2014
Setting the Stage
• Extreme weather
• Vast distances
• Lack of
infrastructure
• Vulnerable Arctic
species,
ecosystems,
cultures
• > 2000 miles of
shoreline
Setting the Stage
• Climate change increasing Arctic
accessibility for commercial activities
•
•
•
•
Oil and gas
Shipping
Fishing?
Tourism
• Arctic oil spills threaten not only U.S.
interests, but all Arctic nations
Image sources: NOAA, BOEM
National Research Council
• Non-government, non-profit
• Mission to advise the government
• Objective, independent
Sponsors
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
American Petroleum Institute
Arctic Research Commission
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
Bureau of Safety and Environmental
Enforcement
Marine Mammal Commission
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
Oil Spill Recovery Institute
U.S. Coast Guard
Summary Statement of Task
• Evaluate the current state of science and
engineering regarding oil spill response and
environmental assessment in Arctic waters
• Scenarios
– Identify areas where current or potential activities
could lead to a marine oil spill
• Preparedness
– Describe anticipated operating conditions
– Assess infrastructure
– Identify ways to work with native communities
and regional government
– Identify gaps for international cooperation
Summary Statement of Task
(cont’d)
• Response and Clean Up
– Evaluate effectiveness of current and new
response technologies for detection, tracking,
separation, and recovery
– Identify capabilities/constraints to minimize
impacts and enhance wildlife recovery
• Environmental Baselines
– Characterize types of baseline information
needed
– Identify sampling and monitoring priorities
Committee Roster
• Martha Grabowski, Chair - Le Moyne College/Rensselaer
Polytechnic Institute
• Tom Coolbaugh - ExxonMobil Research and Engineering
• David Dickins - DF Dickins Associates, LLC
• Richard Glenn - Arctic Slope Regional Corporation
• Ken Lee – CSIRO, Australia
• Lee Majors - Alaska Clean Seas
• Mark Myers - University of Alaska, Fairbanks
• Brenda Norcross - University of Alaska, Fairbanks
• Mark Reed – SINTEF, Norway
• Robert Suydam - North Slope Borough
• Jim Tiedje (NAS) - Michigan State University
• Mary-Louise Timmermans - Yale University
• Peter Wadhams - Cambridge University, UK
Outline
• Environmental Information
Needs
• Oil Spill Response Research
• Logistics, Operations,
Coordination
• Strategies for Response and
Mitigation
Image sources: NOAA, BOEM
Scenarios
• Shipping
• 1 - Passenger
vessel
• 2 - Oil tanker
• 3 - Bulk carrier
• 4 – Tug/barge
• 5 – Pipeline break
• 6 – Wellhead blowout
• 7 - Land-based oil tank
Image sources: NOAA, BOEM
Benchmark Data
• Needed to evaluate change over time
• In Arctic, few reliable baselines (static) or benchmarks
• Critical benchmark data for Arctic oil spill response:
– Distribution and abundance: fish, birds, marine mammals
– Subsistence/cultural use of living marine resources
– Identification and monitoring of areas of biological
significance
– Rates of change for key species
– Sensitivity of key Arctic species to hydrocarbons
– High-resolution coastal topography and shelf bathymetry
– Ice cover, thickness, distribution
Image source: NOAA
Long-term Monitoring Needs
• What’s needed?
– Integration of Arctic data in support of oil spill
preparedness, response, and restoration and
rehabilitation
– International standards for Arctic data collection,
sharing, and integration
– A long-term, community-based, multiuse Arctic
observing system
– Release of proprietary monitoring data from oil
and gas exploration activities
– When appropriate, release of native community
fishing, hunting, and cultural site data
Image sources: NOAA, UAF
Recommendations
• A real-time Arctic ocean-ice-meteorological
forecasting system is needed…and must be
supported by robust, sustainable, and effective
acquisition of relevant observational data.
– Ice movement, type
– Sea state, storm surge
– Ocean stratification and circulation
• Arctic nautical charting and shoreline mapping in
NOAA and USGS plans should be adequately
resourced…initiated, continued, and completed in
timescales relevant to anticipated changes.
– Priorities should be developed in consultation with stakeholders
and industry
The Oil Spill Toolbox
• No single technique will apply in all situations.
• Effective oil spill response requires flexibility to
evaluate and apply multiple response options,
whether on their own or concurrently.
• Timing, capacity, local conditions
Image source: USCG
Oil Spill Response Research
• There has already been much work on behavior of oil
in temperate and cold environments
• Needed: a comprehensive, collaborative, long-term
Arctic oil spill research and development program
that integrates
– Oil behavior—oil & sea ice formation, transport, fate
– Oil spill response and countermeasures
• Detection, monitoring, modeling
• Biodegradation and dispersants
• In situ burning
• Mechanical containment
• Natural recovery
– Improved data & forecasting models
Oil Spill Countermeasures
• Specific R&D needs:
Improved ignition methods for in situ burning
Dispersant effectiveness at low temperatures
Understanding limits of mechanical recovery
Improved under-ice detection and response
Integrating remote sensing and observational
techniques for detection and tracking
– Determining/verifying hydrocarbon biodegradation
rates
– Evaluating the toxicity of dispersants and chemically
dispersed oil on key Arctic marine species
–
–
–
–
–
Recommendations
• A systematic program of carefully planned and
controlled field experiments that release oil in the
U.S. Arctic is needed to advance understanding of
oil behavior and response options.
• Dispersant pre-approval in Alaska should be based
on sound science:
– Research on fates and effects of chemically-dispersed oil
in the environment
– Experiments using Arctic-like oils
– Toxicity tests of chemically-dispersed oil at realistic
concentrations and exposures
– Use of representative Arctic species at appropriate
conditions
Coast Guard Needs
• Low level of presence in Arctic, especially in winter
• Needed:
–
–
–
–
area-specific training
icebreakers
vessels
aircraft and helicopter support facilities
• Arctic assignments for trained and experienced
personnel and tribal liaisons should be of longer duration
• Sustained funding will be needed to increase
the USCG presence in the Arctic and to
strengthen and expand their ongoing Arctic oil
spill research programs
Image source: USCG
Vessel Traffic
• Not actively managed or monitored in the
Bering Strait or in the U.S. Arctic
• No comprehensive system for real-time
traffic monitoring
• Significant vulnerability for U.S. Arctic
missions, including oil spill response
• The Coast Guard should expedite Bering
Strait traffic evaluation – is monitoring
warranted?
Image source Alaska Marine Exchange
Arctic Infrastructure
• Lack of infrastructure is a significant liability
• Effective oil spill response requires improved:
– Communications, transportation, traffic monitoring systems
– Stronger supply chains, pre-deployed response equipment
– Improved port and air access
– Personnel, berthing, housing, waste and medical support
facilities
– Human & organizational infrastructure—tribal liaisons, training
– Integrated scientific and traditional knowledge
• No funding mechanism for development, deployment, and
maintenance of temporary and permanent infrastructure
• A public-private-municipal partnership that receives a
percentage of revenues and royalties could help develop
infrastructure
Image source: NOAA
Community Engagement
• Community expertise - Local knowledge is
key before and during a response
• Local response - Develop and maintain
trained village response teams
– USCG
– ADEC
Image sources: NOAA, USCG
International Agreements
• Formal contingency planning and exercises with
Canada
• Russia’s expansion of vessel traffic through the
Bering Strait
• Resolving anticipated response problems with
Russia (e.g., communications, translators, people
and equipment) needs to be done before an
event, through an active exercise program
• Build on existing bilateral agreements with Russia
and Canada to develop and exercise a joint
contingency plan
Wildlife Impacts
• Federal and state agencies, comanagement organizations, and local
government and communities should
work together with industry to improve
deterrent and rehabilitation methods
• Universities, NGOs, and others could
help with R&D to improve methods
Image source: NOAA
Net Environmental Benefit
Analysis (NEBA)Processes
• Identify effective countermeasures, analyze environmental
tradeoffs
–
–
–
–
–
Protect sensitive/important ecosystem components
Include information on oil transport, fate, and effects
Knowledge of operational limits
Weigh pros and cons of each countermeasure
Consider logistical constraints and cleanup intensity
• Response options with least adverse environmental impacts
– Impacts on Arctic food webs, dynamics at different trophic levels
• Process should involve regulators, resource managers, health
authorities, technical specialists, scientific experts, and local
experts.
Summary
• Environmental Information Needs
– Benchmark data, observing, monitoring, charting/mapping
• Oil Spill Response Research
– Comprehensive, collaborative R&D, controlled oil release,
flexibility in toolbox, R&D needs
• Logistics, Operations, Coordination
– Infrastructure, Coast Guard needs, vessel traffic, local and
int’l needs
• Strategies for Response and Mitigation
– Decisions processes, wildlife mitigation/rehab
Thank you.
The report can be
downloaded here:
Oil interacts with the environment in complex ways
Oil and Gas Activity