Environmental considerations for decommissioning
Kayleigh Hughes A B , Fairul Izmal Jamal Hisne A and Li Yuen Su AA Genesis Oil and Gas Consultants Malaysia Sdn Bhd, Level 8, Menara TechnipFMC, 38 Jalan Inai, 55100, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
B Corresponding author. Email: kayleigh.hughes@genesisenergies.com
The APPEA Journal 61(1) 33-41 https://doi.org/10.1071/AJ20095
Submitted: 18 December 2020 Accepted: 15 January 2021 Published: 2 July 2021
Abstract
The acceleration of decommissioning activities in recent times has expedited the need to decommission responsibly and sustainably. Decommissioning activities are increasingly under public scrutiny, yet in many regions there remains a lack of legislation, regulatory guidance, and practical experience in implementing decommissioning activities. In general, the decommissioning process begins with the assessment stage, followed by planning and management, and lastly the actual decommissioning execution. The best practice approach for responsible decommissioning is to conduct a best practicable environmental option (BPEO) study, which is also known as a comparative assessment and/or decommissioning options assessment. The BPEO will identify the most beneficial or least damaging option to be selected for each decommissioning project by accounting for all relevant influencing aspects such as technical, environmental and social impacts, costs, stakeholder opinions, legal compliance as well as health and safety. Such documentation is important to demonstrate that potential impacts arising from decommissioning activities have either been removed or are reduced to as low as reasonably practicable (ALARP). The best decommissioning option will vary depending on local aspects such as environmental baseline conditions, key stakeholders, waste management and disposal facilities, available technologies and the viability of all options considered including reuse (e.g. rigs to reef). This paper outlines recommended approaches for successful decommissioning planning, highlighting key environmental considerations and other important influencing factors. The aim is to demonstrate the importance of holistic thinking for the development of decommissioning strategies to establish a robust decommissioning plan and successful execution.
Keywords: best practicable environmental option, best practice approach to decommissioning option selection, BPEO, comparative assessment, decommissioning, environmental impacts, habitat management, holistic considerations for decommissioning, NEBA, net environmental benefit analysis, offshore, onshore, residual liability, rigs to reef, stakeholder engagement, successful decommissioning.
Kayleigh has over 12 years’ experience working as an environmental engineer in the oil and gas industry. Kayleigh is the Regional Environment and Decommissioning Engineering Manager at Genesis Energies. Her international decommissioning experience includes developments in the UK, Australia, Malaysia, Brunei and Africa, involving the preparation of BPEO, DOA, DEIA, decommissioning marine license and decommissioning validation studies. Kayleigh currently holds the position of Secretary for the Malaysia Oil and Gas Services Council (MOGSC) Decommissioning Working Group and is a Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE) Decommissioning Committee Member. Previous publications include SPE 199226 MS Must Haves for Credible Comparative Assessment (Hughes and Jagerroos 2019) and SPE-199188-MS Emerging Decommissioning Trends in South East Asia: Local Interpretation and Implementation of Recently Updated Legislative Framework and Guidelines (Jagerroos and Hughes 2019). |
Fairul Izmal Jamal Hisne is currently a Senior Environmental Engineer at Genesis Kuala Lumpur. He graduated from the University of Waikato with a BSc in Marine Sciences. Fairul is an environmental professional with over 10 years’ experience in providing environmental consulting services to a variety of sectors including governments, non-governmental organisations, oil and gas, energy, infrastructure, tourism, and finance. His experience covers projects in multiple regions including Asia Pacific, Europe, Africa and North America across all phases from exploration, to operations, to decommissioning. In addition to his consulting role, he is also the Co-Founder and Vice-Chairperson of The MareCet Research Organisation, a Malaysia-based marine mammal research and conservation organisation. He is a key member of the Southeast Asian marine mammalogist community and is currently serving as the Co-coordinator of the Joint IUCN-WCPA Marine Mammal Taskforce for Southeast Asian Seas and North Indian Ocean Region. |
Li Yuen Su graduated from the University of Nottingham in 2020 with a first-class qualification in MEng Chemical and Environmental Engineering. She joined Genesis Oil and Gas Malaysia Sdn Bhd as a junior environment and decommissioning engineer in August 2020. Since then, she has gained experience relevant to environmental risks, impacts, assessment and management through her involvement in various offshore and onshore oil and gas development projects alongside other highly experienced consultants. |
References
Ajemian, M. J., Wetz, J. J., Shipley-Lozano, B., Shively, J. D., and Stunz, G. W. (2015). Community structure along the northwestern gulf of Mexico shelf: potential impacts of “rigs-to-reefs” programs. PLoS ONE 10, e0126354.| Community structure along the northwestern gulf of Mexico shelf: potential impacts of “rigs-to-reefs” programs.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 25954943PubMed |
Claisse, J. T., Pondella, D. J., Love, M., Zahn, L. A., Williams, C. M., and Bull, A. S. (2015). Impacts from partial removal of decommissioned oil and gas platforms on fish biomass and production on the remaining platform structure and surrounding shell mounds. PLoS ONE 10, e1035812.
| Impacts from partial removal of decommissioned oil and gas platforms on fish biomass and production on the remaining platform structure and surrounding shell mounds.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Cooke, J. A., and Johnson, M. S. (2002). Ecological restoration of land with particular reference to the mining of metals and industrial minerals: a review of theory and practice. Environmental Reviews 10, 41–71.
| Ecological restoration of land with particular reference to the mining of metals and industrial minerals: a review of theory and practice.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Cordes, E. E., Jones, D. O. B, Schlacher, T. A., Amon, D. J., Bernardino, A. F., Brooke, S., Carney, R., Deleo, D. M., Dunlop, K. M., Escobar-Briones, E. G., Gates, A. R., Génio, L., Gobin, J., Henry, L-A., Herrera, S., Hoyt, S., Joye, M., Kark, S., Mestre, N. C., Metaxas, A., Pfeifer, S., Sink, K., Sweetman, A. K., and Witte, U. (2016). Environmental impacts of the deep-water oil and gas industry: a review to guide management strategies. Frontiers in Environmental Science 4, .
| Environmental impacts of the deep-water oil and gas industry: a review to guide management strategies.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Department of Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (BEIS) (2018). Decommissioning of Offshore Oil and Gas Installations and Pipelines. Guidance Notes, November 2018. Available at https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/760560/Decom_Guidance_Notes_November_2018.pdf
Fam, M., Konovessis, D., Ong, L., and Tan, H. (2018). A review of offshore decommissioning regulations in five countries – strengths and weaknesses. Ocean Engineering 160, 244–263.
| A review of offshore decommissioning regulations in five countries – strengths and weaknesses.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Fowler, A., Macreadie, P., Jones, D., and Booth, D. (2014). A multi-criteria decision approach to decommissioning of offshore oil and gas infrastructure. Ocean & Coastal Management 87, 20–29.
| A multi-criteria decision approach to decommissioning of offshore oil and gas infrastructure.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hughes, K., and Jagerroos, S. (2019). Must Haves for a Credible Comparative Assessment. Paper presented at the SPE Symposium: Decommissioning and Abandonment, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, December 2019. (Society of Petroleum Engineers.)
IOGP (2017). Overview of International Offshore Decommissioning Regulations Volume 1 – Facilities. Report, July 2017. Available at https://www.iogp.org/bookstore/product/overview-of-international-offshore-decommissioning-regulations-volume-1-facilities/
Jagerroos, S., and Hughes, K. (2019). Emerging Decommissioning Trends in South East Asia:- Local Interpretation and Implementation of Recently Updated Legislative Framework and Guidelines. Paper presented at the SPE Symposium: Decommissioning and Abandonment, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, December 2019. (Society of Petroleum Engineers.)
Lakhal, S., Khan, M., and Islam, M. (2009). An “Olympic” framework for a green decommissioning of an offshore oil platform. Ocean & Coastal Management 52, 113–123.
| An “Olympic” framework for a green decommissioning of an offshore oil platform.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Oil & Gas UK (OGUK) (2015). Guidelines for Comparative Assessment in Decommissioning Programmes. Guidelines, Issue 1, October 2015. (OGUK)
Palandro, D. and Aziz, A. (2018). Overview of Decommissioning Option Assessment: A Case for Comparative Assessment. Paper presented at the SPE Symposium: Decommissioning and Abandonment, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, December 2018. (Society of Petroleum Engineers.)
Pondella, D. J., Zahn, L. A., Love, M. S., Siegel, D., and Berstein, B. B. (2015). Modeling fish production for southern California’s petroleum platforms. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management 11, 584–593.
| Modeling fish production for southern California’s petroleum platforms.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 26331484PubMed |
Sommer, B., Fowler, A. M., Macreadie, P. I., Palandro, D. A., Aziz, A. C., and Booth, D. J. (2019). Decommissioning of offshore oil and gas structures – environmental opportunities and challenges. Science of the Total Environment 658, 973–981.
| Decommissioning of offshore oil and gas structures – environmental opportunities and challenges.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
UNEP (2009). ‘Marine Litter: A Global Challenge. Report, April 2009.’ (UNEP: Nairobi.)
UNEP (2020). Regional Seas Programmes. Available at https://www.unenvironment.org/explore-topics/oceans-seas/what-we-do/working-regional-seas/regional-seas-programmes
