Design for decommissioning – focusing on preventative strategies and beneficial impact assessment for managing offshore infrastructure in situ
Alison J. Duguid A * , Leanne Geneve B and Nick Nelson CA GHD Pty Ltd, Perth, WA, Australia.
B Wood Australia, Perth, WA, Australia.
C Montrose Environmental, North Little Rock, AR, USA.
The APPEA Journal 62 S246-S250 https://doi.org/10.1071/AJ21019
Accepted: 8 March 2022 Published: 13 May 2022
© 2022 The Author(s) (or their employer(s)). Published by CSIRO Publishing on behalf of APPEA.
Abstract
Offshore oil and gas infrastructure removal can have significant impact to newly developed ecological services, human safety, fuel consumption emissions and unrecoverable costs. Through Net Environmental Benefit Analysis-Comparative Assessments (NEBA-CA) it is evident that in situ alternatives can alleviate some of these impacts. In situ management of infrastructure is currently restricted by state, commonwealth and international legislation in Australia resulting in the base-case of full removal often being favoured. The default to full removal is often due to areas of uncertainty such as long-term infrastructure stability, polymer and material degradation, intergenerational eco-toxicological impact and commercial fisheries risks. This paper will present front-end design alternatives to address these areas of uncertainty and provide a more robust justification for leaving infrastructure in place post decommissioning.
Keywords: design for decommissioning, innovative solutions, manage in situ, material degradation, Net Environmental Benefit Analysis‐Comparative Assessments (NEBA‐CA), offshore decommissioning, substructures and pipelines, sustainable decision making.
Alison J. Duguid is GHD Pty Ltd’s offshore decommissioning comparative assessment project lead with experience in delivery of multiple studies assessing the net impact and benefit of different decommissioning options. Her role included leveraging of previous experience in safety risk and climate risk assessment to provide a fresh perspective on alternative decommissioning activities. Using her Masters in Professional Engineering (majoring in chemical engineering), Alison has also been involved in numerous projects from hydrogen energy feasibility studies to end-of-life material recovery and circular economy-based principles. |
Leanne Geneve has more than 20 years’ experience in the subsea oil and gas industry. She graduated from the University of Western Australia with a Civil Engineering degree and began her career as a subsea pipeline engineer with J P Kenny in Perth. She worked for several years as a Subsea Designer in Stavanger, Norway. Today, Leanne is a Project Manager, Principal Engineer and the Decommissioning Lead for Wood Consulting. She has been an active committee member and is currently Treasurer for the Perth branch of the Society for Underwater Technology. |
Nicholas (Nick) Nelson is a scientist at Montrose Environmental Group. He earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in International Management with Minors in Applied Mathematics and Environmental Science from Franklin University Switzerland in 2018 and will graduate with a Master of Science degree in Biodiversity, Wildlife, and Ecosystem Health from the University of Edinburgh in 2023. He has conducted and co-authored multiple Net Environmental Benefit Analyses-Based Comparative Assessments (NEBA-CAs) as applied to offshore oil and gas infrastructure decommissioning. Mr. Nelson’s primary experience is in ecological service valuation using the Habitat Equivalency Analysis & Resource Equivalency Analysis and commercial & personnel risk assessment. Mr. Nelson has led and supported decommissioning projects in the North Sea, Gulf of Mexico and Western Australia, and has experience conducting assessments in the regulatory climates associated with each. |
References
BHP (2021) Griffin facility decomissioning – comparative assessment reference booklet. Available at https://www.bhp.com/-/media/project/bhp1ip/bhp-com-en/documents/sustainability/environment/regulatory-information/griffin-decommissioning/210528_grffindecomm_referencebooklet_final.pdfBoschee P (2014) Engineering for decommissioning during project design reduces costs. Oil and Gas Facilities 3, 24–29.
| Engineering for decommissioning during project design reduces costs.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Bright-r (2019) Artificial ‘King Reef’ is a huge biodiversity success. Available at https://bright-r.com.au/artificial-king-reef-is-a-huge-biodiversity-success/#:~:text=King% 20Reef% 2C% 20located% 20about% 20a% 20ten-minute% 20dinghy% 20ride,two% 20acres% 20of% 20barren% 20seafloor% 20in% 20August% 202018
Cabboi A, Segeren M, Hendrikse H, Metrikse A (2019) Vibration-assisted installation and decommissioning of a slip-joint. Available at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/337557064_Vibration-assisted_installation_and_decommissioning_of_a_slip-joint
Chatterjee P (2011) What are the main risks facing a host state when designing a regime for offshore decommissioning? Available at SSRN https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1915802
Fowler AM, Macreadie PI, Jones DOB, Booth DJ (2014) A multi-criteria decision approach to decommissioning of offshore oil and gas infrastructure. Ocean and Costal Management 87, 20–29.
| A multi-criteria decision approach to decommissioning of offshore oil and gas infrastructure.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Giraldo-Ospina A, Kendrick GA, Hovey RK (2020) Depth moderates loss of marine foundation species after an extreme marine heatwave: could deep temperate reefs act as a refuge? Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 287, 20200709
| Depth moderates loss of marine foundation species after an extreme marine heatwave: could deep temperate reefs act as a refuge?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Macreadie PI, Fowler AM, Booth DJ (2011) Rigs‐to‐reefs: will the deepsea benefit from artificial habitat? Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 9, 455–461.
| Rigs‐to‐reefs: will the deepsea benefit from artificial habitat?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
National Energy Resources Australia (2021) Centre of Decommissioning Australia (CODA). Available at https://www.nera.org.au/CODA
National Remediation Framework (2019) Guideline on implementing long-term monitoring. Available at https://www.crccare.com/knowledge-sharing/national-remediation-framework
Nicolette J, Burr S, Rockel M (2013) A practical approach for demonstrating environmental sustainability and stewardship through a net ecosystem service analysis. Sustainability 5, 2152–2177.
| A practical approach for demonstrating environmental sustainability and stewardship through a net ecosystem service analysis.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Oil and Gas UK (2013) Long term degradation of offshore structures and pipelines: decommissioned and left in-situ. Report No. 002-121-RPT-001. Available at https://nerc.ukri.org/innovation/activities/energy/oilandgasprog/d4d-workshop-report/
Reed E (2021) Decommissioning accident kills four offshore Libya. Available at https://www.energyvoice.com/oilandgas/africa/rigs-vessels-africa/362487/four-workers-killed-sloug/
Torabi F, Tababaye Nejad SM (2021) Legal regime of residual liability in decommissioning: the importance of role of states. Marine Policy 113, 104727
| Legal regime of residual liability in decommissioning: the importance of role of states.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
