Transatlantic Science Week 2010

Transcription

1 Transatlantic Science Week 2010 Oil spill: Monitoring, effects and response Oil spill response R&D in SINTEF The Arctic and the Deepwater Horizon GoM Tore Aunaas Research Director SINTEF 1

2 Outline of the presentation The SINTEF infrastructure related to oil spill research and how we think and work Oil spills in arctic waters SINTEF involvement in the Deepwater Horizon incident in GoM use of modeling tools

3 Technology for a better society SINTEF is a non profit polytechnic research foundation, performing contract research and development for industry and the public sector SINTEF is the no. 4 largest independent research institute in Europe with more than 2100 employees In 2009 SINTEF carried out more than 6500 projects for over 2000 unique customers 3

4 MARINE LABORATORIES SINTEF SEALAB Trondheim, Norway 4

5 SINTEF FIELD STATION, SVALBARD 5

6 OIL IN ICE Oil/ ice interactions Oil weathering Behavior and fate Response operations Main Oil spill R&D activities SURFACE Oil spreading properties Oil life-time on the sea surface Dispersibility of weathered oils Effects on seabirds Oil Spill Identification OIL ON SHORE Natural processes Remediation / in-situ treatment Injection of dispersants and chemicals in underwater blowouts WATER COLUMN Fate of dispersed and sub-merged oil Acute toxicity / effects Chronic effects Fish Behavior grafisk/admtegner/div-psd/bonnex-filmthickness examples-nov-01.ppt SHALLOW WATER / SEABED Oil / sediment interactions Degradation of oil in sediment The knowledge, results, data and experience basis for further development of operative model tools for use in: - NEBA / contingency planning / ERA - Decision-making during response operations

7 Marine Environmental Technology Physics Mathematics Microbiology Ecotoxicology Lab studies Meso-scale experiments Statistics Informatics Numerics Ecology Field trials Numerical simulation Analytical chemistry Hydrology and Oceanography Organic chemistry 7

8 Oil weathering processes - open water

9 Bench-scale preparation and testing of w/o- emulsions. (water uptake / kinetics and stability) ( Rotating flasks - modified after Mackay and Zagorski) Definition of stability: Fraction water dehydrated from the emulsion after: - 1 h settling - 4 h settling - 24 h settling Viscosity (both before/ after settling) Informative for the operative handling of recovered emulsion during response (incl. Use of em.breakers)

10 Weathering study in mesoscale flume basin (example with Heidrun crude oil) Just after release on water: Viscosity: 10 cst After 1 hour: un-stable emulsion: Water: 50% Viscosity: 1000 cst After 3 days: Stable emulsion: Water: 75% Viscosity: cst

11 Oil Weathering Model

12 All oils in production in Norway are categorised for their weathering properties North Star ANS Alpine ANS Endicott ANS ANS MSRC

13 What is special with oil spills in ice..? Focusing on weathering processes in bulk oil phase Drift, spreading and oil interaction with ice AMAP 1997 The complexity of an oil spill in ice can be higher compared to an oil spill in open water

14 Questions raised on oil spills in ice 1. Can we cope with oil spills in ice covered waters? 2. What effects do we expect the oil to have on wildlife and the ecosystem? The questions we would ask ourselves could be 1. How much of the oil has evaporated the first day? 2. What is the volume increase due to emulsification? 3. What could be the windows of opportunity and the potential for different response methods: In situ burning (ignitable?) Use of dispersants (dispersible?) Mechanical recovery of oil (film thickness?)

15 As far as we know; The most extensive oil in ice R&D program to date Contact info; 15

16 Partners and Contributors Advance and develop knowledge, methods and equipment for oil spill response In Arctic and ice-covered waters. Funding organisations Main cooperating organisations Major R&D partners S L Ross Ltd (Canada) + Dickins Associates (USA) 16

17 Oil in Ice JIP Pre-project Lab/basin/field experiments and tests Full scale field trial Conclusion Full scale field test Small scale Field tests Large lab Flume test Lab scale State of art Large number Promising methods New solutions 17

18 Oil-in-Ice JIP - 9 projects, 25 subprojects P1 FATE AND BEHAVIOUR P2 IN SITU BURNING NEW AND IMPROVED OIL SPILL TECHNOLOGY P3 MECHANICAL RECOVERY P6 GENERIC OIL SPILL RESPONSE GUIDE EXPAND WINDOW OF OPPORTUNITY P4 CHEMICAL DISPERSANTS P8 FIELD EXPERIMENTS UPGRADED OIL WEATHERING MODEL P5 REMOTE SENSING EXPERIENCE, KNOWLEDGE, TACTICS P9 OIL ICE INTERACTION

19 Fate and behavior of oil in ice Experimental concept Small-scale SeaLab (20 liters) Meso-scale Svalbard (200 liters) Large-scale Svalbard (7000 liters) 21 experiments 9 experiments 1 experiment

20 Emulsification - Field versus Lab. data The field data verifies the meso-scale experiments at 70-90% ice coverage

21 Mapping ISB ignitability the approach Laboratory cell studies (100 ml) Meso-scale Svea (200 litres) Full-scale field studies 2009 (2000 litres) 21

22 Burning of oil spills - Basics

23 Containment by chemical herders How do they work? Small amounts of herder sprayed on water around perimeter of slick Herder rapidly spreads to form monolayer Herder changes surface chemistry of water causing slick to contract into smaller area

24 In situ burning in field Oil spill contingency\ice\fex09 Brenneforsøk Lance UTEN MUSIKK.mov 24

25 Lab testing - dispersant effectiveness Step 1: Effectiveness screening of 6 dispersants Step 2: Full test of the best dispersant to find time window

26 What is an oil spill dispersant? Soap (similar to a shampoo or a domestic detergent) Mixtures of surfactants in a solvent Solvents: a carrier for the surfactants (Glycolether, water, low arom-paraffin, 20-80%) Surfactants (20-80%) are the active ingredients Water soluble ( head ) Oil soluble ( tail ) Similar surfactants are used in many foods, in cosmetics etc.

27 Dispersant testing in field Oil spill contingency\ice\fex DISPERGERING UTEN MUSIKK.mov 27

28 Tests and development of skimmers for recovery of oil in ice

29 Many remote sensing options for oil in ice! 29

30 Conclusions from the program A comprehensive knowledge base for oil spill response in ice-covered waters. A systematic way to predict the operational time frame for response options. All the response options are keys to a successful oil spill response operation in the Arctic. The presence of low temperatures and ice enhance response effectiveness by slowing the weathering processes and limiting oil spreading. 30

31 The different response tools demonstrated functionality in the Arctic environment. In situ burning and chemical dispersion can be highly effective response methods. The window of opportunity for in situ burning and the use of dispersants can be significantly larger compared to open water conditions. New technologies for mechanical oil spill recovery and dispersant application has demonstrated improvement on oil spill response in ice covered waters. 31

32 Large-scale field experiments proved to be an important verification of results from a number of small- and medium-scale laboratory experiments being performed during the program. A significant data set has been collected that will aid further model development; development of new technologies for oil spill countermeasures. The practical experience is regarded to be very important for spill response and contingency planning strategies. 32

33 MC 252 Deepwater Horizon blow-out in Gulf of Mexico, April 21st. July 15th (86 days) Drilling oil platform (BP) Deepwater Horizon Mississippi Canyon Block 252, the Macondo well April 21st.: explosion 11 persons killed (100 saved) April 23 th. Platform Sank Oil Release estimate: - in the beginning: <1000 m 3 crude oil / day ) - later estimates: ca m 3 crude oil / day April July: many attempts to stop the release Total release: ca tons (4.9 mill. bbl) grafisk/admte

34 Major oil spill blow-outs Recent blow-outs: Montara Well (North West Australia, 2009): m 3 DWH Gulf of Mexico (20. April-15. July, 2010): m 3 = 20 x Exxon Valdez spill

35 DeepSpill - JIP-project (26 oil companies and organisations) June 2000 at Helland Hansen Release at 844 m depth: Release 1: 60 m 3 Marine Diesel Oil at Helland Hansen Release 2: 60 m 3 Oseberg crude 6 remote sensing aircraft

36 SINTEF involvement in the DWH incident During the spill Numerical modelling (daily forecasting): Spreading of sub-surface / surface oil - Week 1-2 (April): for NOOA - May July: for BP SINTEF involvement at the ICP Houma, Louisiana (May/ June) - Dispersant Assessment Group (DAG) - Field work / emulsion sampling (in support of dispersant response strategies) - Follow up testing of GoM samples at SINTEF (weathering/dispersability) Ongoing: Oil Budget Calculator (US Government NOOA). Participating in the expert group Weathering studies of the MC252 oil (to support the modeling) Numerical modeling: building a comprehensive mass-balance and most realistic post-response simulation (OSCAR) Planned: Study of the dissolution potential from droplets rising in the water column Various experimental Studies: e.g. effectiveness of sub-surface dispersant injection and fate of the oil, degradation of oil in deep waters ++++

37 Properties of the MC 252- DWH crude oil. Medium light paraffinic crude oil

38 Sampling and measurements at Sea Norwegian Sampling kit (A) for Sampling at sea/shore under response operations

39 DWH-spill in Gulf of Mexico, June, 2-5 th SINTEF crew performs sampling and measurements grafisk/admtegner/div-psd/bonnex-filmthickness examples-nov-01.ppt grafisk/admte

40 Position 3 (June :30, 17 nm north of source) Reddish Emulsion heavily weathered, 2-4 mm Sample date: Sampling time: 09: GPS position: N28º W88º Water content: 50 % Evap. loss: 55% Viscosity: 7200 cp Interfacial tension: 2.0 mn/m SINTEF FET-test: Good dispersible grafisk/admte

41 Large variability of the surface oil Pictures: Lucy Heathcote, OSRL

42 Flume experiment: Gentle Breaking Wave Conditions 4 days + 5 days gentle waves ( total 9 days): Oil heavily emulsified Orange or reddish colour Large lumps in the water and no small droplets) grafisk/admte

43 Dispersibility Testing at SINTEF MNS dispersant test grafisk/admte

44 Follow-up studies of the emulsified field samples at SINTEF Oil Spill Laboratory Dispersibility with increasing weathering (Viscosity boarders) Dosages: 1 : Good / easy Dispersible: < cp Reduced Dispersibility Poor Dispersible: > cp grafisk/admte

45 Dispersant use at DWH incident 4000 m m m 3 Corexit 9500: 90 % Corexit 9527: 10 % grafisk/admte

46 Sub-sea addition of dispersants into the damage riser on the sea- bottom Dispersant dosage tube injected aboat 1 m into the damaged Subsea riser grafisk/admte

47 Sub-sea addition of dispersants into the plume - injection (60 m 3 / day) through a wand held by ROV grafisk/admte

48 OSCAR Oil Spill Contingency and Response Model 48

49 Processes included in OSCAR Response actions Evaporation from water to air (Re)surfacing of droplets, slick formation Dissolution from entrained droplets Degradation Surface processes: Drifting, spreading Natural dispersion Emulsification Evaporation Stranding Particulate adsorption/desorption Plume dynamics Settling Sediments: deposition, dissolution, degradation

50 SINTEF MEMW: Marine Environmental Modelling Workbench DREAM Risk Analysis for Operational Releases ParTrack Drill Muds and Cuttings Operations OSCAR Oil Spill Response Strategy Analysis 3-D Stochastic Analysis for Oil Spill Contingency Planning Natural Resource Damage Assessment SINmod GeoSim Hydrodynamics OWM Oil Weathering Model Chemical Parameters Biological Parameters Environmental Data Sets Toxicological Parameters 50

51 SINTEF Model Applications and Installations Svalbard Barents Sea Greenland Norwegian Sea Alaska Baltic Sea North Sea Canada New England Gulf of Mexico Venezuela France Italy Mediterranean Arabian Gulf Nigeria China S. China Sea Chile Brazil Angola Namibia 10/20/2010 Realfagsdagen

52 Weathering processes - important for optimizing the response operation How can we predict Oils properties at sea?

53 First simulations of the DWH-release with OSCAR MMT Modelling Capacities -- for Statoil Oct 2010\nearfield.mp4 53

54 Thank you for your attention! 54