Oil exploration is a multifaceted process that requires careful planning. Environmental experts state that there is a need to conduct environmental impact assessment (EIA) prior to commencing the exploration process. Environmental impact assessment process begins with the identification of issues and impacts that are likely to be important and the establishment of terms of reference for the EIA. Secondly, there is the identification of alternatives; in this case, environmentally sound and benign options are identified. Thirdly, EIA involves impact analysis. This involves the identification and prediction of environmental, social and other effects of the exploration process. Fourthly, there is mitigation and impact management; this involves the identification of measures that are necessary to avoid, minimize, or offset predicted adverse impacts, and where appropriate, to incorporate this into an environmental management plan. Finally, there is the evaluation of significance to determine the relative importance and acceptability of the impacts that cannot be mitigated. This process has been adopted in many oil explorations regions as potential explorers are expected to provide their proposals for scrutiny prior to being given permits to conduct the oil exploration.
Following years of hydrocarbon exploration in the tropical rainforest biome of South America, a new bidding process requires that an environmental licence be obtained prior to the call for tenders and allocation of blocks. This new tendering procedure intends to safeguard bidder’s investment by avoiding the risk of winning oil blocks in sensitive areas that could later be declined environmental permit. Therefore, an IOC aims to produce an environmental assessment report to support its bid prior to the commencement of exploration and production activities in one of the blocks. This paper seeks to provide an EIA report on expected oil exploration in the Panama region of Brazil.
The oil exploration exercise in the Panama region will involve the following activities:
(i) Seismic data acquisition to build 3D picture of the basin. It includes line preparation using heavy duty slashers e.t.c.
(ii) Drilling rig operation (weathering layer/ shothole)
(iii) Vibrator trucks and geophone operation
(iv) Routine operations such as refueling etc.
- Scoping
The planned exploration is expected to take place in the Barra Bonita region in Parama, Brazil.
- Examination of alternatives
Oil exploration begins with clearing the site; this allows for the demarcation of the area and installation of machinery that will be used in the exploration process (Wathern, 2002; NRC 2001; Knights 1999). The aforementioned activities cannot be overlooked or by-passed; they must be conducted before the exploration proceeds commences. Therefore, the only alternative approach available is to use eco-friendly procedures or machines in carrying out those activities. This has been outlined in the next chapter: impact analysis and mitigation.
- Impact analysis and mitigation
Activity one will entail seismic data acquisition to build picture of the basin. This will involve the use of heavy duty slashes. Such heavy machinery may result into noise and air pollution in the outskirts of the exploration area (Scholarly Editions 2012; Measham and Lockie, 2012 ;Markandya 2001). This may affect the ecological balance of nearby wildlife and aquatic life.
Mitigation: Use of other land clearing procedures that do not produce noise and aqautic pollution.
The second activity will involve land drilling using drilling rigs. Noise generation is the principal environmental impact of this process. During this operation, drill rigs produce low frequency noises. According to (APPE 1996), an anchored semi-submersible drill rig can produce sound ranging from 0.016 to 0.2 kHz accompanied with received tonal levels of 167 and 171 re micro Pa-m (Roberts 2001). Additional noise is produced by other machines serving the drill rigs; noise originating from these vessels comes from propellers, engines, gears and thruster noise if the vessels rely on DP (Roberts 2001). The noise levels are shaped by the ambient noise levels, the sound transmission conditions of the host environment, the strength of the sound source, and the proximity of the animals to detect the noise originating from these drill facilities (Roberts 2001).
Mitigation: The type of facility selected and their moorings influences the level of noise produced during the drilling process. Certain drilling facilities are known to produce more underwater noise than others. For instance, semi-mersibles and drill ships operating on DP are the noisiest; therefore, it is advisable to select a drilling facility that produces the least noise levels (Roberts 2001). However, other factors influence the choice of drilling facilities; what is critical here is that reduction of noise levels should be included in the factors used to determine the drilling facility to be used (Islam, Chhetri and Khan 2011). The amount of cuttings generated as well as the quantity of well mud are influenced by the stratigraphy and well design (Islam, Chhetri and Khan 2011).
Ecosystems risks: This is likely to affect aquatic lives in the neighboring regions as well as other wild animals living in the neighborhood of the explored site. Such noise might disrupt the normal coexistence of the wildlife in the neighboring areas. Semi-mersible drill rigs employ anchors for positioning. Anchors which are sub-merged in surrounding water body and their associated scouring action may disrupt aquatic life in those water bodies (Islam, Chhetri and Khan 2011).
Mitigation: As mentioned before, the reduction of noise levels should be included in the factors used to determine the drilling facility to be used (Islam, Chhetri and Khan 2011). Additionally, use of rig facilities which require subsea anchors should be avoided if possible (Islam, Chhetri and Khan 2011).
Water impacts (Chemical risks):
During the drilling and exploration processes, there is the production of spent drill mud and drill cuttings, which must be disposed off. For instance, cuttings and particulate material from spud mud used to drill the top hole section as well as a small proportion of cement used to secure the first set of settings, often finds itself in the at the sea bed (nearby water body) (Islam, Chhetri and Khan 2011). These discharges will end up in the nearby water bodies. These discharges create plumes of suspended fine sediments and this may cause localized chemical changes following the settlement of the sediments in the water column (Islam, Chhetri and Khan 2011). Generally, chemicals are usually added to cement and drilling mud to secure well casings. Additionally, drill rigs and ships often carry contingency chemicals that may be used in adverse conditions; the potential effects of such chemicals on the environment must be evaluated (Islam, Chhetri and Khan 2011; Kutz and Elkamel 2010). Such chemicals are at times toxic to marine animals thus assessing their eco-friendliness is paramount (Judd and Hovland 2007).
Mitigation: This can be achieved by offsetting the landfill issues to some degree: this involves the use of OBM procedures and skip and ship procedures (Gao 1998). These approaches will be essential in the reduction of the amount of cement, cuttings and residual materials that would have otherwise found themselves in the nearby water bodies (IAGC 1999). OBM and skip and ship procedures are more environmental friendly than WBM approach (IAGC 1999).
The third activity will involve vibrator trucks and geophone operation. Geophone operation has no environmental effects (Roberts 2001). However, vibrator trucks produce noise and air pollution; exhaust emission from the trucks causes air pollution; generates hydrocarbons in the air (Edwards 2006). The major environmental impact is noise pollution. This may disrupt nearby wildlife as well as aquatic life (Edwards 2006).
Mitigation: Is critical to incorporate noise pollution in the selection criteria of vibration trucks (DCENR 2007).
Additionally, there will be routine operations such as refueling. A host of facilities that will be used at the exploration site use fossil fuel; this is a potential source for air, water and soil pollution of nearby areas (DCENR 2007).
Mitigation: pollution resulting from refueling can be minimized by taking extra caution during the refueling processes (Bjørlykke and Avseth 2010). Spillage should be avoided as it is the main source through which fossil fuel may find its way to the environment.
In socioeconomic terms, this exploration will create jobs for the neighboring communities as well as earn foreign exchange not only for parama, but also for Brazil at large. The explore commodity is on high demand both locally and internationally; if it is extracted in an ecofriendly manner, then it will provide significant economic benefits to the local communities and the country at large.
- Environmental Impact statement
Oil exploration activity targeting the Barra Bonita region in Parama, Brazil is a viable activity that will provide economic benefits to the local communities as well as the country. The four activities discussed here included, data acquisition to build picture of the basin and this will involve the use of heavy duty slashes; land drilling using drilling rigs; vibrator trucks and geophone operation; and routine operations such as refueling because a host of facilities that will be used at the exploration site use fossil fuel. The aforementioned activities cannot be by-passed; they must be conducted before the exploration process commences. Therefore, the only alternative approach available is to use eco-friendly procedures or machines in carrying out those activities.
Conclusion
In summary, this report has shown that Oil exploration is a multifaceted process that requires careful planning. Environmental experts state that there is a need to conduct environmental impact assessment (EIA) prior to commencing the exploration process. Environmental impact assessment process has five aspects. The first aspect begins with the identification of issues and impacts that are likely to be important and the establishment of terms of reference for the EIA. Secondly, there is the identification of alternatives; thirdly, EIA involves impact analysis. Fourthly, there is mitigation and impact management. Finally, there is the evaluation of significance to determine the relative importance and acceptability of the impacts that cannot be mitigated. This report has evaluated all this aspects and suggests that the oil exploration process that is anticipated in the Barra Bonita region in Parama, Brazil is viable because it will bring forth huge economic returns to the local communities and the country at large.
Bibliography.
APPE 1996 Code of Environmental Practice, Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association LTD, Sydney.
Bjørlykke, K & Avseth, P 2010 Petroleum geoscience: from sedimentary environments to rock physics, Heidelberg, Springer.
Edwards, A 2006 The sustainability revolution: portrait of a paradigm shift. Philadelphia, Pa, New Society.
Gao, Z 1998 Environmental regulation of oil and gas, London [u.a.], Kluwer Law Internat.
IAGC 1999 IAGC for worldwide geophysical operations, IAGC publishers, Texas.
Islam, M, Chhetri, and Khan, M 2011 The Future of Petroleum Operations, New York, John Wiley & Sons.
Judd, A and Hovland, M 2007 Seabed fluid flow: the impact of geology, biology, and the marine environment, Cambridge [u.a.], Cambridge University Press.
Kutz, M and Elkamel, A 2010 Environmentally conscious fossil energy production, Hoboken, N.J., Wiley.
Knights, K. 1999 A basic introduction to managing risk using the ANZ risk management standard, Standards Associations Australia, New South Wales.
Markandya, A 2001 Measuring environmental degradation: developing pressure indicators for Europe, Cheltenham [u.a.], Edward Elgar.
Measham, T, and Lockie, S 2012 Risk and social theory in environmental management, Collingwood, Vic, CSIRO Pub.
Roberts, D 2001 Environmental Impact Report Seismic Operations in the Otway Basin, South Australia.
National Research Council (NRC) 2001 Oil in the seas III: inputs, fates, and effects, Washington, D.C., National Academies Press.Bottom of Form
Scholarly Editions 2012 Issues in Global Environment: Biodiversity, Resources, and Conservation: 2011 Edition.
Wathern, P 2002 Environmental Impact Assessment: Theory and Practice, California, CA, Rutledge.
