ENVIRONMENT: DR MARTIN DYER
would be analysed in order to determine the current impact of the structure. Further monitoring may also be required following decommissioning and an appropriate monitoring programme could be designed for approval by the regulators.
Protected habitats and invasive alien species
A survey of the fauna colonising the rig may be required by the regulators, and underwater video is often the most appropriate method. Certain organism can colonise rigs, such as the cold water coral Lophelia and the reef building worm Sabellaria, and these habitats have protected status. If such organisms are found, further consultation about the implications of their removal will need to be considered with the regulators. A review of the least harmful method of decommissioning would be undertaken and appropriate mitigation proposed.
Non-native species may have colonised the rig and the implications of transporting the rig inshore for decommissioning would need to be considered. Bringing unwanted invasive alien species onshore should be avoided as populations could expand dramatically, to the detriment of the local fauna.
WWW.THECONNECTSERIES.CO.UK
A review of bird populations in the area would also be required to determine the most appropriate time of year to undertake decommissioning in order to avoid excessive disturbance. Similarly, a review of fish and cetaceans inhabiting the area, and the likely impact of noise on cetaceans, will allow an assessment of the time of year least likely to affect populations.
Other issues
The biological implications have been considered here, but some other issues include:
• the implications of chemical pollution from discharges;
• the energy used and the atmospheric emissions released;
• possible archaeological features that might be affected;
• options for recycling some of the structures;
• location of decommissioning site.
Once all the information is available, the most appropriate course of action for decommissioning would need to be reviewed with the regulators and submitted as an EIA.
If such organisms are found, further consultation about the implications of their removal will need to be considered with the regulators. A review of the least harmful method of decommissioning would be undertaken and appropriate mitigation proposed.
By appointing a marine consultancy at an early stage, which has experience of collecting, collating and interpreting data and liaising with the regulators, unforeseen delays and costly constraints can be avoided.
Oil&GasCONNECT 41
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116