Enhancing the management of decommissioning activities in joint development areas
Aaron Tung A *A Curtin University Oil & Gas Innovation Centre, Curtin University, Kent St, Bentley, WA 6102, Australia.
The APPEA Journal 62(1) 172-184 https://doi.org/10.1071/AJ21202
Submitted: 30 December 2021 Accepted: 21 January 2022 Published: 13 May 2022
© 2022 The Author(s) (or their employer(s)). Published by CSIRO Publishing on behalf of APPEA.
Abstract
Establishing joint development areas is a solution that can be used by sovereign states to exploit resources in areas with maritime disputes. However, when legislation and regulations governing these joint development areas were established, less attention was given to the challenges of oil and gas decommissioning. As part of wider research to investigate stakeholder impacts on oil and gas decommissioning activities in the United Kingdom and Australia, a significant emergent finding was that there are various regulatory uncertainties regarding the rules, standards and procedures that should be adopted when managing oil and gas decommissioning activities in joint development areas. One reason for these uncertainties is because there is still an ongoing debate regarding the nature and definition of joint development areas as political entities. These uncertainties are unfavourable because oil and gas decommissioning activities can have significant social, political, environmental and even economic impacts. Rather than focusing on the debate regarding the definition of joint development areas as political entities, this paper proposes that governments enhance the prescriptiveness of existing joint development agreements to address these regulatory uncertainties. This approach is favourable, as joint development agreements can also be utilised in order to incentivise the sharing of resources and collaboration amongst stakeholders. Such an arrangement can facilitate the better management of oil and gas decommissioning activities in joint development areas, and hence, minimise the overall decommissioning liabilities of organisations, institutions and governments.
Keywords: Asia-Pacific, decommissioning, energy law, environmental management, joint development areas, ocean management, oil & gas, regulatory governance.
Aaron Tung is a joint PhD graduate from the University of Aberdeen and Curtin University under the prestigious Aberdeen-Curtin Alliance programme. Aaron’s research lies in the field of oil and gas decommissioning and focuses on the creation of stakeholder-orientated critical paths for offshore decommissioning projects in the United Kingdom and Australia in order to guide the management of future decommissioning projects. Aaron also has a Bachelor degree in Petroleum Engineering from Curtin University. |
References
Alexander, J, Ackermann, F, and Love, PED (2019). Taking a Holistic Exploration of the Project Life Cycle in Public–Private Partnerships. Project Management Journal 50, 673–685.| Taking a Holistic Exploration of the Project Life Cycle in Public–Private Partnerships.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Beckman, R (2013). The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and the Maritime Disputes in the South China Sea. American Journal of International Law 107, 142–163.
| The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and the Maritime Disputes in the South China Sea.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Beckstead, D (2018). Lessons from Thailand on the Importance of Devising and Implementing Detailed Decommissioning Regimes. Oil, Gas & Energy Law Journal (OGEL) 16, .
Bull, AS, and Love, MS (2019). Worldwide Oil and Gas Platform Decommissioning: A Review of Practices and Reefing Options. Ocean & Coastal Management 168, 274–306.
| Worldwide Oil and Gas Platform Decommissioning: A Review of Practices and Reefing Options.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Buszynski, L, and Sazlan, I (2007). Maritime Claims and Energy Cooperation in the South China Sea. Contemporary Southeast Asia 29, 143–171.
| Maritime Claims and Energy Cooperation in the South China Sea.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Chandler, J, White, D, Techera, EJ, Gourvenec, S, and Draper, S (2017). Engineering and Legal Considerations for Decommissioning of Offshore Oil and Gas Infrastructure in Australia. Ocean Engineering 131, 338–347.
| Engineering and Legal Considerations for Decommissioning of Offshore Oil and Gas Infrastructure in Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Friedmann, W (1970). The North Sea Continental Shelf Cases – A Critique. American Journal of International Law 64, 229–240.
| The North Sea Continental Shelf Cases – A Critique.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Gao, Z, and Jia, BB (2013). The Nine-Dash Line in the South China Sea: History, Status, and Implications. American Journal of International Law 107, 98–123.
| The Nine-Dash Line in the South China Sea: History, Status, and Implications.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Gordon G, Paterson J, Usenmez E (2018) ‘UK Oil and Gas Law: Current Issues and Emerging Trends: Volume I: Research Management and Regulatory Law.’ (Edinburgh University Press: Edinburgh)
Hamzah, BA (2003). International Rules on Decommissioning of Offshore Installations: Some Observations. Marine Policy 27, 339–348.
| International Rules on Decommissioning of Offshore Installations: Some Observations.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hong N (2012) ‘UNCLOS and Ocean Dispute Settlement: Law and Politics in the South China Sea.’ (Routledge)
IOGP (2017) ‘Overview of International Offshore Decommissioning Regulations Vol. 1 – Facilities.’ (International Association of Oil & Gas Producers)
Keyuan, Z (2006). Joint Development in the South China Sea: A New Approach. International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 21, 83–109.
| Joint Development in the South China Sea: A New Approach.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Lundahl, M, and Sjöholm, F (2008). The Oil Resources of Timor-Leste: Curse or Blessing? The Pacific Review 21, 67–86.
| The Oil Resources of Timor-Leste: Curse or Blessing?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
MTJA (2011) The Malaysia–Thailand Joint Authority Act 1990 (Amended 2011).
Oh, TH, Pang, SY, and Chua, SC (2010). Energy Policy and Alternative Energy in Malaysia: Issues and Challenges for Sustainable Growth. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 14, 1241–1252.
| Energy Policy and Alternative Energy in Malaysia: Issues and Challenges for Sustainable Growth.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Pollett BB (2017) Well Abandonment and Decommissioning Challenges – Outline of the U.S. Federal Offshore Legal Framework. Paper presented at the Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, USA, May 2017. Paper no. OTC-27948-MS.
| Crossref |.
Santos (2020) Bayu-Undan to Darwin Gas Export Pipeline Decommissioning and Preservation Environment Plan. Available at https://docs.nopsema.gov.au/A742625 (Accessed 20 June 2021)
Saunders M, Lewis P, Thornhill A (2016) ‘Research Methods for Business Students.’, 7th edn. (Pearson: Harlow, England)
Schofield, CH, and Townsend-Gault, I (2011). Choppy Waters ahead in “A Sea of Peace, Cooperation and Friendship”?: Slow Progress Towards the Application of Maritime Joint Development to the East China Sea. Marine Policy 35, 25–33.
| Choppy Waters ahead in “A Sea of Peace, Cooperation and Friendship”?: Slow Progress Towards the Application of Maritime Joint Development to the East China Sea.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Storey, IJ (1999). Creeping Assertiveness: China, the Philippines and the South China Sea Dispute. Contemporary Southeast Asia 21, 95–118.
| Creeping Assertiveness: China, the Philippines and the South China Sea Dispute.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Sumner, BT (2003). Territorial Disputes at the International Court of Justice. Duke Law Journal 107, 142.
Techera, EJ, and Chandler, J (2015). Offshore Installations, Decommissioning and Artificial Reefs: Do Current Legal Frameworks Best Serve the Marine Environment? Marine Policy 59, 53–60.
| Offshore Installations, Decommissioning and Artificial Reefs: Do Current Legal Frameworks Best Serve the Marine Environment?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Trevisanut, S (2020) Decommissioning of Offshore Installations: A Fragmented and Ineffective International Regulatory Framework. In ‘The Law of the Seabed’. (Ed. C Banet) pp. 431–453. (Brill Nijhoff)
| Crossref |.
Tularak A, Khan WA, Thungsuntonkhun W (2007) Decommissioning Challenges in Thailand. In ‘SPE Asia Pacific Health, Safety, and Security Environment Conference and Exhibition, Bangkok, Thailand, 10 September 2007’, Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Tung A (2020) Design and Analysis of Stakeholder Oriented Critical Paths for Offshore Decommissioning Projects in the United Kingdom and Australian Landscape Using Mixed Methods. In ‘Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, 4 May 2020’, Offshore Technology Conference.
| Crossref |
Tung, A (2021). Co-Creation of Knowledge – An Effective Mechanism for Managing Decommissioning Stakeholders. The APPEA Journal 61, 48–57.
| Co-Creation of Knowledge – An Effective Mechanism for Managing Decommissioning Stakeholders.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Tung A, Otto C (2019) Lessons Learnt from OSPAR and the North Sea: The Importance of Establishing a Regional Decommissioning Agreement in the South China Sea Region. In ‘SPE Symposium: Decommissioning and Abandonment, Kuala Lumpur, 2 December 2019’, Society of Petroleum Engineers.
| Crossref |
Vuttipittayamongkol, P, Tung, A, and Elyan, E (2021a). A Data-Driven Decision Support Tool for Offshore Oil and Gas Decommissioning. IEEE Access 9, 137063–137082.
| A Data-Driven Decision Support Tool for Offshore Oil and Gas Decommissioning.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Vuttipittayamongkol P, Tung A, Elyan E (2021b) Towards Machine Learning-Driven Practices for Oil and Gas Decommissioning–Introduction of a New Offshore Pipeline Dataset. In ‘The 2021 9th International Conference on Computer and Communications Management, Singapore, 16 July 2021’, pp. 111–116.
| Crossref |
Woodside (2021) Our Business – Timor-Leste. Available at https://www.woodside.com.au/our-business/timor-leste (Accessed 20 June 2021)
Zyglidopoulos, SC (2002). The Social and Environmental Responsibilities of Multinationals: Evidence from the Brent Spar Case. Journal of Business Ethics 36, 141–151.
| The Social and Environmental Responsibilities of Multinationals: Evidence from the Brent Spar Case.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
