Oil Pollution Response Research Articles

OIL POLLUTION CONTROL AND SPILL RESPONSE CAPABILITY IN THE ROPME SEA AREA

ABSTRACT The ROPME sea area as defined in this paper is the scene of some of the world's most intensive offshore oil exploration and production and the associated crude oil refining and tanker terminaling for oil exportation. The potential for oil pollution in the area is high, with its confined nature making it especially vulnerable to the effects of oil pollution. Awareness of this problem is well developed in the region in both government and industry, and good progress has been made in recent years toward preparing for the big oil spill which has so far not materialized, but which most experts consider inevitable at some time. Two distinct groups share the concern for oil pollution. The oil industry has well over 40 companies active in the area in some way. Many of these have a 15 year history of cooperation in oil spill response and continue to play a full role in protecting the environment from the adverse effects of oil pollution. More recently, nations bordering the area have taken an active interest in the problem and have demonstrated an impressive record of commitment and action over the past five or six years. While government and industry have maintained their separate identities, a good working relationship exists between them, and there is good information exchange and practical cooperation between the two groups, most especially at the national level. Future years should see this trend develop even further. A very impressive arsenal of oil pollution response equipment has been built up in the sea area since two major oil spill incidents in 1980. What is especially noticeable now is the proportion of this equipment that is owned and operated directly by the government agencies. This stands in marked contrast to the situation in 1980. In addition to the equipment resources available, the pool of personnel trained in oil spill response technology and methods is rapidly expanding as a result of seminars, workshops, and training courses that are being organized on a regular basis. The development of national and regional legislation to control the main sources of man-made pollution, for example, from tanker operations and offshore exploration and production, is in a very active stage and the oil industry is expected to have clear operational guidelines within the next few years.

A MAJOR OIL BARGE POLLUTION INCIDENT ON THE ARKANSAS RIVER

ABSTRACT When the towboat Girard Lewis lost power on the Arkansas River Navigation System, it drifted into a railroad bridge near Pine Bluff, Arkansas. Upon impact, it lost the two oil barges it was pushing; one barge floated downstream and was impaled by icebreakers on U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Lock and Dam No. 4. The resulting damage to the barge caused a major discharge (8,000 barrels) of No. 6 fuel oil, which affected industrial and recreational uses of the river and threatened sensitive environmental areas, including the White River National Wildlife Refuge. The discharger accepted responsibility for salvage of the damaged barge but not for containment and cleanup of the spilled oil. Consequently, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency initiated a federal removal project using the oil pollution response fund authorized under the Clean Water Act. A coordinated effort among at least seven federal and state agency representatives on site was carried out over 25 days. Special problems were encountered and resolved involving unusually high river flow, large amounts of debris, use and effectiveness of various oil recovery devices, barge salvage operations, closure of the navigation system to traffic, protection of environmentally sensitive areas, and levels of cleanup of shorelines and locks and dams. The project was effectively carried out over 60 miles of affected river at a cost of $372,000, with a minimum of environmental and real property damages. It was the worst pollution incident that has occurred on the Arkansas River Navigation System.

State of the art in high sea-state oil pollution response capabilities

This paper describes the state-of-the-art approaches to dealing with the two major types of open-water pollution incidents encountered in bad weather — a tanker stranding where the oil is still contained within the tanks, and an actual spillage from a damaged tanker or fixed source. In the stranding case, the cargo off-loading approach is compared with cargo jettisoning (pumping part of the cargo overboard) and stabilization approaches. In the spillage case, the basic approaches that are feasible are skimming and the use of dispersants. The advantages of each are discussed. Systems including large containment barriers are estimated to be less effective than direct-acting skimmers because of the operational control problems in high sea states. Effective direct-acting skimmers are not in wide-spread use at present, although several systems are under development. Dispersant systems are estimated to have the highest sea-state operating capability, particularly aircraft-application systems, which could be effective in conditions up to where a slick is rapidly dispersed through natural wave turbulence.

COLD REGIONS SPILL RESPONSE1

ABSTRACT As a part of its Arctic Pollution Response Research and Development Program, the U.S. Coast Guard in 1977 awarded a systems analysis contract to ARCTEC Incorporated to identify the pollution response system requirements for dealing with spills in ice-infested waters. A cold regions oil pollution response system was defined through an engineering and cost effectiveness analysis of six oil spill scenarios, selected to encompass the broad range of oil spill and environmental conditions likely to be encountered offshore Alaska. Also identified were modifications to the system required to extend the response capability to the seasonally ice-infested waters of the lower 48 states, including the Great Lakes, the northern rivers, and the northern coastal regions. Projections were made of the behavior of the spilled oil in ice-infested waters, and oil spill response scenarios were developed for three levels of spill response. Three distinctly different types of spill response operations were identified: (1) for a thick, stable, level shorefast ice situation; (2) for a dynamic, hum-mocky, heavily concentrated broken ice situation; (3) for the case of light broken ice and open water. The presence of ice was found to aid response efforts in some cases and to hinder or preclude response efforts in others. This paper discusses the three types of spill response required for cold regions and reviews the six Alaskan and three lower 48 scenarios used to define the system requirements.