You are on page 1of 86

Research report

Modeling of potential
oil spill behavior
when operating
Prirazlomnaya OIFP

Assessment of possible
oil spill emergency response

RGC Risk Informatics

SOI HydroMetCenter AARI


|1
ISBN 978-5-94442-033-6
Contents
Research team: 5
List of tables 5
List of figures 5
List of figures 5
List of abbreviations 7
Introduction 9

Section 1. OIFP Prirazlomnaya oil spill modeling 11


1.1. Prirazlomnoye oil properties 12
1.2. Accident Scenarios 14
1.2.1. Crude Carriers Accidents 15
1.2.2. OIFP Prirazlomnaya Well Accidents 15
1.2.3. OIFP Prirazlomnaya Oil Storage System Accidents 16

1.3. Hydrometeorological and Ice Conditions 16


1.3.1. Hydrometeorological and Ice Conditions 16
1.3.2. Ice Conditions 18

1.4. Numerically Simulated Model Description 22


1.4.1. SpillMod 22
1.4.2. OilMARS 24

1.5. Oil spill behavior modeling and


environmental risk assessment 25
1.5.1. Oil Spill Propagation during Ice-Free Period 25
Oil Spill Spatial And Geometric Characteristics 25
Oil Spill Weathering 25
Oil spill potential propagation zones, waters and coast pollution risk zones 25
Damage to coasts and specially protected natural reservations 26
1.5.2. Spill propagation in ice period 28

|3
Section 2. Evaluation of oil spill emergency
response capabilities 41
2.1. Equipment and technologies used
for oil spill response 42
2.1.1. Special equipment under OSR Plan 42
2.1.2. Response technologies and conditions their use 43
Booms 44
Skimmers 45
Trawl systems 45

2.2. Assessment of oil spill response conditions


in the Pechora Sea 45
2.2.1. Hydrometeorological conditions 47
Local conditions at OIFP area 47
Regional conditions of the Pechora Sea 47
2.2.2. Astronomical conditions 50
2.2.3. Response efficiency limitations 50

2.3. Analysis of individual spill scenarios,


response conditions and OSR operations 52
2.3.1. Ice-free period 53
Protection of Dolgy Island, 10,000 t spill 53
Protection of Gulyaevskie Koshki islands, 10,000 ton spill 65
Protection of Dolgy Island, 1,500 t spill 70
2.3.2. Ice Season 71
Spilling of 1,500 tons of oil in 72 hours 73
Spilling of 16,000 tons (breakdown of the OIFP oil storage) 73
Spilling of 10,000 tons (crude carrier accident) 73

Conclusion 81
Endnotes 83

4|
Research team:

Zhuravel V.I., Cand. Sc., Engineering, RGC Risk – Project Director


Informatics

Zhuravel I.V., SRC Morneftegas – Analysis and assessment of response conditions and
force use efficiency

Zatsepa S.N., Cand. Sc., Physics and – Calculations and analysis of oil spill spread statistics
Mathematics, SOI under SpillMod, Model originator

Zelenko A.A., Cand. Sc., Physics and – Wind condition data preparation and analysis
Mathematics, HydroMetCenter of the Russian
Federation
Ivchenko A.A., SOI – Calculations and analysis of oil spill spread statistics
under SpillMod, calculation of SpillMod scenarios,
Model originator
Kulakov M.Y. Cand. Sc., Physics and – Hydrometeorological data analysis and preparation
Mathematics, AARI for OilNARs model

Lobov A.L., Cand. Sc., Geography, – Currents and wind data preparation
HydroMetCenter of the Russian Federation

Popov S.K., Cand. Sc., Physics and – Currents and wind data analysis and preparation
Mathematics, HydroMetCenter of the Russian
Federation
Resnyansky Y.D., DSc, Physics and – Wind condition data analysis and preparation
Mathematics, HydroMetCenter of the Russian
Federation
Svetov S.A., ABC EXOD – International practice applicability analysis and
assessment

Smolyanitsky V.M., Cand. Sc., Geography , AARI – Ice condition surveillance data analysis and
preparation

Solbakov V.V., Cand. Sc., Physics and – Calculations and analysis of oil spill spread statistics
Mathematics, RAS DP Center (SOI) under SpillMod

Stanovoy V.V., AARI – Calculations of oil spill spread under OilNARs model,
Model originator

|5
List of tables
Table 1 - Oil Properties 12
Table 2 - Long-time average annual data on the Pechora Sea ice cover 21
Table 3 - Ice cover in the southeast part of the Barents Sea, 1996 to 2003, % 22
Table 4 - Booms 36
Table 5 - Skimmers 36
Table 6 - Water-borne vehicles 44
Table 7 - Comparison of response results 62
Table 8 - Comparison of response results 65
Table 9 - Spill state comparison 70

List of figures
Figure 1. Potential Fractional Oil Content 14
Figure 2. External view of Mikhail Ulianov Crude Carrier 15
Figure 3. Estimated probability of oil spill of 10,000 t for crude carriers with deadweight 60,000 t 16
Figure 4. External view of OIFP Prirazlomnaya at the point of installation 17
Figure 5. Upper estimate of 16,000 t oil spills for OIFP Prirazlomnaya
(based on oil spill probability for crude carrier with deadweight of 115,000 t) 17
Figure 6. Examples of design hudrometeorological events 19
Figure 7. Cotidal maps for M2 tidal wave 19
Figure 8. Sea surface tidal stream ellipses for M2 tidal wave 20
Figure 9. Wind module at the height of 10 m based on CFSR data from 01.01.2000 to 31.12.2009 20
Figure 10. Wind patterns in OIFP location 21
Figure 11. Average ice consolidation in OIFP location for 1999-2000 23
Figure 12. Ice conditions in 1999-2012 23
Figure 13. 1,500 t and 10,000 t spill geometric characteristics during 3 days (2,000 during 12 hours) 26
Figure 14. 10,000 t spill geometric characteristics during 5 days (2,000 during 12 hours) 27
Figure 15. Ranges of 1,500 t oil spill potential aeolation 28
Figure 16. Ranges of 10,000 t oil spill potential aeolation 28
Figure 17. Waters pollution risk zones in ice-free period 29
Figure 18. Probability of waters polluting within 5 days in ice-free period 30
Figure 19. Probability of waters polluting within 10 days in ice-free period 31
Figure 20. Risk zones of waters pollution within 24 hours in ice-free period 32
Figure 21. Probability of polluting 1 km of coastline within 5 days in ice-free period 33
Figure 22. Probability of polluting 1 km of coastline within 10 days in ice-free period 34
Figure 23. Maximum oil slick thickness during 10 days in ice-free period 35
Figure 24. Probability of damage to coasts in ice-free period 35
Figure 25. Probability of damage to SPNRs in case of a 3-day spill 36
Figure 26. Probability of damage to SPNRs in case of a 5-day spill 36
Figure 27. Probability of higher length of coast line effected 37

6|
Figure 28. Probability of damage to Dolgy Island as a function of time after the spill 37
Figure 29. Areas of potential basin damage in ice period 38
Figure 30. Probability of basin damage over 10 days in ice period 39
Figure 31. OSR operations efficiency statistics 42
Figure 32. “Vladislav Strizhov” and “Yury Topchev” vessels 43
Figure 33. Dependences of oil collection performance at sea 45
Figure 34. Diagram for assessing performance of a trawl oil-collecting system 45
Figure 35. Probability of exceeding the current velocity thresholds in the area of Prirazlomnoye Oil Field 47
Figure 36. Probability of exceeding the wind speed thresholds in the OIFP area 47
Figure 37. Probability fields for exceeding the wind speed thresholds in the Pechora Sea 48
Figure 38. Probability fields for exceeding the significant wave heights in the Pechora Sea 49
Figure 39. Probability fields for exceeding the specified current velocities in the Pechora Sea 50
Figure 40. Boom line behavior under the influence of wind and currents 51
Figure 41. Annual changes in astronomical conditions at OIFP latitude 52
Figure 42. Dynamics of astronomical and hydrometeorological conditions 54
Figure 43. Oil spill evolution under the scenario with free flow of 10,000 t spill 55
Figure 44. Dynamics of boom applicability and efficiency windows 55
Figure 45. Boom application time distribution 56
Figure 46. Situational plans (response started 2 hours after the spill) 58
Figure 47. Boom positioning option (response started 2 hours after the spill) 59
Figure 48. Series of spill spread layouts for a 5-day period 61
Figure 49. Estimated response results after 48 hours 62
Figure 50. Spill approach to the coast of Dolgy Island (44 hours after the spill start) 63
Figure 51. Modeling the operations for protecting the coast of Dolgy Island 63
Figure 52. Modeling the operations for protecting the coast of Dolgy Island 64
Figure 53. Spill state dynamics during response 64
Figure 54. Dynamics of spill evolution under adverse conditions at the initial stage 65
Figure 55. Spill dynamics with rapid washing ashore the Dolgy Island 67
Figure 56. Dynamics of freely spreading spill causing damage to Gulyaevskie Koshki islands 67
Figure 57. Spill location and configuration 120 hours after its start 68
Figure 58. Estimated spill dynamics 69
Figure 59. Pollution of Gulyaevskie Koshki islands with and without oil spill response 69
Figure 60. Estimated dynamics of a 1,500 t spill 70
Figure 61. 1,500 t spill comparison with and without the spill response 71
Figure 62. Comparison of Dolgy Island pollution due to 1,500 t spill with and without the response 71

List of abbreviations
ERT – emergency-response team
OIFP – off-shore ice-resistant fixed platform
OSR – oil spill response
GIS – geographical information system
SPNR – specially protected natural reservation

|7
Introduction

The purpose of this research is to assess capabilities of The research took into consideration requirements and
emergency response related to the potential oil spills provisions of principal laws, statutes and regulations
when operating OIFP Prirazlomnaya. of the Russian Federation on the issues considered,
including those related to oil spill prevention and
Basic instruments for attaining
response:
the objective are as follows:
• Key requirements to oil and oil product spill prevention
• Analysis of operation data available on OIFP
and response plan development (approved by the RF
Prirazlomnaya operations, first of all the data that may
Government Decree No.613 dated 21.08.2000);
affect the performance of OSR operations;
• Rules for oil and oil product spill prevention and
• Analysis of capabilities and constraints of technical
response activities on the territory of the Russian
means in use;
Federation (approved by the RF Government Decree
• modeling of oil spill behavior, oil pollution risk No. 240 dated 15.04.2002;
assessment and technology and force application
• Development and coordination rules for plans of oil
based on hydrometeorological conditions and
and oil product spill prevention and response on the
technical capabilities;
territory of the Russian Federation (approved by the
• Analysis of modeling results and identification of Order of the RF Ministry for Emergency Situations No.
conditions and situations that may hinder oil spill 621 dated 28.12.2004.
cleanup capability;
In terms of methodology this research follows principal
• Oil spill clean-up possibility estimations and stages of offshore hydrocarbon spill risk assessment2.
conclusions.
The research was performed by Risk Informatics
In order to support the objectives: Research Guidance Center with the assistance of various
experts indicated in Research Team Section, and using
• A series of oil spill ultimate scenarios was defined and
data referenced in the report and indicated in the List of
accident risks were assessed;
reference links.
• Oil spill environmental behavior was considered;
The report includes 9 tables and 71 diagrams. The
• Various oil spill response strategies and techniques reference list includes 44 links.
were considered and assessed.
The research drew on the following project realization
data made public by Gazprom Neft Shelf, LLC1:
• Synopsis on OIFP Prirazlomnaya feasibility study and
Group project of Prirazlomnoye oil field operating
(production and injection) well construction;
• Synopsis on Prirazlomnaya off-shore ice-resistant fixed
platform Oil spill prevention and response plan;
• Synopsis on OIFP Prirazlomnaya Industrial Safety
Declaration.
Public access to these materials gives the opportunity
to avoid providing of general information on OIFP
Prirazlomnaya location, structure and operation details.

|9
OIFP Prirazlomnaya
oil spill modeling
1

Section 1
OIFP Prirazlomnaya
oil spill modeling

| 11
1.1. Prirazlomnoye oil properties
Oil properties are given using reference data3 as shown in Table 1:

Table 1 - Oil Properties

Property Value
Density at 20°С, kg/m3 911,0
Kinematic viscosity at 20°С, mm2/s 19,3
Pour point, °С -30
Mass content, % wt:
total sulphur 2,2
paraffin/paraffin melting temperature 1,8/50
silica gel resins 11,0
asphaltenes 2,0
V, µg/g -
Ni, µg/g 911.0 -
Benzenes
Fraction IBP - 120°С
Yields per barrel, % wt 4,5
Density at 20°С, kg/m3 730,2
Octane number, MON 60
Hydrocarbon-type content, % wt
paraffinic 62
naphthenic 30
aromatic 8
Fraction IBP - 180°С
Yields per barrel, % wt 11,7
Density at 20°С, kg/m 3
751,8
Sulphur, % wt 0,06
Octane number, MON 55
Hydrocarbon-type content, % wt
paraffinic 51
naphthenic 34
aromatic 15

12 |
OIFP Prirazlomnaya
oil spill modeling
1

Property Value
Kerosene
Fraction 120-210°С
Yields per barrel, % wt 11.9
Density at 20°С, kg/m 3
791.0
Kinematic viscosity at 20°С, mm /s 2
1.35
Content, % wt:
total sulphur 0.2
mercaptan sulphur -
aromatic hydrocarbons < 22
Smoke point, mm 25
Chill point, °С <-60
Diesel distillates
Fraction 120-311°С
Yields per barrel, % wt 31.6
Density at 20°С, kg/m 3
840.0
Kinematic viscosity at 20°С, mm2/s 3.5
Content, % wt:
total sulphur 0.53
mercaptan sulphur -
Pour point, °С -41
Property Value
Cloud point, °С <-25
Cetane number 36
Fraction 180-320°С
Yields per barrel, % wt 26.8
Density at 20°С, kg/m 3
859.2
Kinematic viscosity at 20°С, mm /s 2
4.9
Sulphur, % wt:
total 0.8
1 -
Pour point, °С -23
Cloud point, °С <-5
Cetane number 41
Residuum
Fraction >320°С
Yields per barrel, % wt 61.5
Density at 20°С, kg/m 3
950.0
Kinematic viscosity at 20°С, mm2/s -
Pour point, °С <42
Sulphur, % wt: 3.2
V, µg/g -
Ni, µg/g -
Carbon content, % wt 10.0

| 13
This oil is classified as high-sulphur, paraffinic, and • Oil spill in the event of the temporary oil storage
bituminous. damage with the volume up to 16,000 tons during 5
days
Fractional oil content used for the calculations is shown
on Fig. 1. These accidents correspond to the dimensioning oil spills
volumes for the offshore facilities and crude carriers.
Control inverted emulsion test was performed to identify
Scenarios 1 and 2 are included in OSR Plan of the
its environmental fracturing behavior regarding inverted
company operating Prirazlomnaya OIFP in value specified,
emulsions which occurrence could affect significantly on
and Scenario is accepted in the OSR Plan at the level
both oil spill modeling and oil spill response technology
of 8,000 tons. Differences in oil spill volume estimates
assessment. Simulation model4 test demonstrated that
are due to the fact that as per OSR Plan the OIFP is
the emulsion is unstable for the given oil properties. Due
considered a temporary oil storage (dimensioning oil spill
to this fact the possibility of stable emulsions occurrence
equals separate oil storage maximum capacity) and, at
in oil spills was not considered.
the same time, the OIFP is officially registered as a vessel
At the same time the value of asphaltene-resins ratio is (design-basis oil spill equals the volume of 2 tanks).
near critical wherein meso-stable emulsion can occur.
All scenarios are the ultimate ones in terms of oil spill
It shall be taken into account, as prior to first actual
volumes per respective sources5,6,7 and their analysis can
production there is a period of uncertainty in oil properties
be viewed as a a kind of the stress test for environmental
and its environmental behavior.
protection system in emergencies.
This study does not analyze emergency and rescue
1.2. Accident Scenarios operations and engineering and technical measures to
The present study addresses the following accidental oil be undertaken on the OIFP or a damaged oil carrier to
spill scenarios: stop or minimize oil spillage (for example, lightering of oil
from the damaged tanks) as well as potential fire fighting
• Oil spill in the event of crude carrier accident with the operations that may require the engagement of duty
volume up to 10,000 tons during 5 days; rescue vessel. It is assumed that all means provided for
• Oil spill in the event of the well blowout with the volume by the Prirazlomnaya OIFP OSR Plan are available for the
up to 1,500 tons during 3 days; OSR operations including duty stand-by vessel.

Figure 1. Potential Fractional Oil Content

14 |
OIFP Prirazlomnaya
oil spill modeling
1

Modeling is performed for situations when continuous


boom around the spill source is impossible to install
for some reason (for example, open blowout jet fire,
adverse hydrometeorological conditions). The realistic
nature of this assumption for the Pechora Sea will
be demonstrated later when assessing the oil spill
response with tidal current breaking boom’s stability and
configuration.

1.2.1. Crude Carriers Accidents


It is assumed that oil transportation from the
Prirazlomnaya OIFP is provided by crude carriers with
Figure 2. External view of Mikhail Ulianov Crude Carrier9
deadweight up to 70,000 tons. Arctic crude carriers of
R-7004688 design will be used – a series of with Azipod
propulsion system manufactured jointly by Finnish estimate of 10,000 t and more oil spills gives the value
company Aker Arctic Technology and Russian company less than 1.0 x 10-5 1/year.
Admiralty wharfs. Crude carriers Mikhail Ulianov and Kirill In addition to volume, location and time oil spills from
Lavrov are equipped with double Azipod 2 x 8.5 allowing crude carriers have the following characteristics: intensity,
make 16 knots in free water; 3 knots when moving spillage dynamics, and related oil spill duration. They may
through flat first year ice 0.5 m thick; 3 knots when affect the estimated oil spill environmental behavior and
moving stern-first through flat first-year ice 1.2 m thick planned measures for oil spill containment and cleanup.
and snow cover 0.2 m thick.
Currently there is no unified or generally accepted
Crude carriers have 10 cargo oil tanks with 87 029 m3 of approach in place to define crude carrier oil spill
total capacity. Fuel capacity equals 2,332 m3; diesel oil scenarios. Russian regulatory documents define only
reservoir equals 122 m3. the general volume of oil spill (2 adjoining tanks’ loads)
Mikhail Ulianov crude carrier (owned by Sovkomflot, JSC; without specifying their duration. Modern foreign sources
see Fig. 2) has the following characteristics: length - 257 suggested various approaches:
m; width - 34 m; hull height - 21.6 m; and draft - 14 m. • duration of oil spill from damaged crude carrier equals
According to the estimate based on a modified statistical 10 hours11;
model10 of formal risk analysis of crude carriers’ • 50% of oil spills into the sea immediately, the rest 50%
ecological safety, frequency of an accident scenario with - within the following 24 hours12;
10,000 tons spill in the result of collision or grounding of
• 25% of oil in damaged tanks from above the breach
a model double-hull 60,000 t deadweight carrier, was
spills into the sea within 20 minutes; the rest oil is
identified as follows:
expelled within the following 24 hours13;
1. Zero spill probability in the event of the accident –
• 25% of oil spills into the sea within the 1st hour; the
0.81;
rest oil within the following 12 hours14.
2. Probability of oil spill equal to or exceeding 10,000 t in
the event of oil spill – 3.54 x 10-3 (see Fig. 3); This study uses damaged carrier oil spill scenario under
which 20% of oil will be spilled within 12 hours and the
3. Probability of oil spill equal to or exceeding 10,000 t rest 80% is considered constant. This scenario was
in the event of the accident – 3.54 x 10-3 x (1-0.81) = selected as a compromise combination of instant and
6.73 x 10-4. continued oil spills.
The planned production profile will require about 100
ship entries per year. A conservative assessment of 3 1.2.2. OIFP Prirazlomnaya Well Accidents
days required for oil-bulk stowage and departing loaded The project provided for 36 wells including 19 production
carriers from the Pechora Sea, gives the total residence wells, 16 – injection wells, and 1 intake well. If drilling
time of loaded carrier equal to less than a year. Under program lasts 5 years it will require 6-7 wells to be placed
quite a prudent estimate of crude carrier accident in production with total blowout risk amounting
probability of 1.0 x 10-2 1/year, the overall probability

| 15
Probability of exceeding in the event of an accident, %

deadweight 60,000 t

spill of 10,000 t or more


average spill volume

in the event of
an accident

Oil spill volume, m3

Figure 3. Estimated probability of oil spill of 10,000 t


for crude carriers with deadweight 60,000 t

6.1 x 10-4 1/year (as per the North Sea data15 to suggest that its accident rate in terms of potential oil
including data on drilling and production and injection spills is equal or less than of carriers with similar capacity
well completion). Last years of drilling program (Fig. 5).
implementation will be associated with the increased
Assuming ship/OIFP collision frequency at the level typical
risk when most of production wells will be operated
for fixed facilities in the North Sea (9.5 x 10-3 1/year with
simultaneously with drilling. On later stages production
damaged facilities17) and extreme ice event frequency at
well operation will be associated with blowout risk
5.0 x 10-4 1/year, we get estimated value of 16,000 t oil
amounting about 7.2 x 10-4 1/year.
spill accident frequency less than 1.0 x 10-5 1/year.
Probability of the implementation of scenario with blowout
of 1,500 t equals 1.8÷2.2 x 10-4 1/year and is evaluated
based on average open flow amounting 500 t/day and 1.3. Hydrometeorological
probability of well control restoring during 3 days in 70% and Ice Conditions
of cases16.
1.3.1. Hydrometeorological and Ice Conditions
1.2.3. OIFP Prirazlomnaya Oil Storage Regional hydrometeorological conditions are analyzed as
System Accidents follows:
Based on information available OIFP Priralomnaya • publicly available information from Global Reanalysis
(Fig. 4) was registered in vessel register of Naryan- Project18, 19 database was used as a background
Mar Seaport Administration on 26.04.2012 (Naryan- information, implemented by the US National
Mar Branch of the Seaport of Murmansk Sea Port Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (10-year
Administration Federal State Institution, registered in values of the sea level pressure in increments of 6
the Register of Seaports of the Russian Federation hours and 2.5 x 2.5 degrees for 2000-2010);
by the Order of Rosmorrechflot No. AD-325-r dated
19.11.2020). • near-water wind speed values20, 21 were defined based
on atmospheric pressure field values (background
Unique design of OIFP Prirazlomnaya temporary oil information for surface atmospheric pressure was
storages (gravity platform, double boards and bottom, derived from regional atmospheric model of Russian
concrete spacing between the boards, wet storing) does Hydrometeorological Centre22 with time steps of 6
not allow using available statistics. It seems reasonable hours);

16 |
OIFP Prirazlomnaya
oil spill modeling
1

• sea temperature and salinity values were obtained Calculations rely on monthly positions of ice edge.
from available observation data (12 average monthly
As an example Fig. 6 demonstrates pressure values
climatic temperature and salinity values were used);
at the sea level and calculated values of near-water
• hydrodynamic calculations of summary currents wind direction and intensity, sea levels, surface current
in increments of 1 hour were based on special direction and capacity for two design hydrometeorological
numerically simulated model that relies on the Barents events.
Sea basin tides (including 8 major tidal harmonics)23.
The Barents Sea tidal stream rates are significantly higher
that rates of constant non-periodical currents. Maps of
tidal stream ellipses and cotidal maps were obtained for 8
tidal harmonics.
Figure 7 shows cotidal maps of M2 tidal wave major
harmonic for September when the Barents Sea is almost
ice-free, and for April when ice cover is the largest.
Figure 8 shows sea surface tidal stream ellipses for M2
tidal wave for the same months (aquatorium areas with
tidal streams rotating counter-clockwise are highlighted
with color).
Hydrometeorological data for simulating spill propagation
distance in variable ice conditions were also derived
as wind distribution functions based on reanalysis
data of CFSR meteorological values24 for 10 years
Figure 4. External view of OIFP Prirazlomnaya at the point
from 01.01.2000 to 31.12.2009. Calculations rely on
of installation reanalysis data on wind speed at the height of 10 m.
Probability of exceeding in the event of an accident, %

deadweight 115,000 t
deadweight 60,000 t

Oil spill volume, m3

Figure 5. Upper estimate of 16,000 t oil spills for OIFP


Prirazlomnaya (based on oil spill probability for crude
carrier with deadweight of 115,000 t)

| 17
Data spatial resolution in the area of the platform location The freeze-up period in the southeast part of the Barents
is ~12 km x 34 km, and 1 hour time increment. Sea may last 2-3 months while possible breakup may
take about 3 months. Under favorable conditions ice
Wind module at the point of Prirazlomnaya platform is
season lasts 3-4 months only, and ice-free season – 8-9
shown in Fig. 9 based on CFSR data for the period from
months. In unfavorable conditions these periods are 10-
01.01.2000 to 31.12.2009.
11 months and 1-2 months, respectively (Table 2)26.
Fig. 10 shows wind pattern for the entire year, August
During the first part of winter season Varandey coast is
(typical ice-free period) and March (typical month of the
characterized with unstable fast ice belt consisting of
ice season).
ice 0.2-0.3 m thick that may breakup repeatedly when
1.3.2. Ice Conditions exposed to swell wave, tide water and windstorm. Under
average conditions stable fast ice belt usually forms in
Current modeling for open water spill behavior late February – March when ice becomes 0.5-0.7 m
calculations relied on ice edge position data. Ice thick. Year-to-year variations range within 3 months.
presence defines the area affected by wind drag force Usually fast ice belt is spread alongshore as 2-5 km
and alters tidal stream mode. Official data of ice regime narrow zone but in harsh winters when ice-edge moves
generalization prepared by Roshydromet companies were westward, ice belt may be of 10-15 km width. Ice belt
used to consider ice effect in current models. Ice cover 100% frequency isogram is roughly the same as 5 m
data is relied upon in accordance with ten-day (climatic) isobath, and with islands is roughly coincides with 10 m
ice limit position of 50%-reliability that is included directly isobath.
in 5-mile grid points.
While water area is freezing-up, usually in November –
Ice cover status data is based on ship observations, ice March, ice-edge moves westward for about 800 km.
patrol flights and WS observations (data series for the Under long-time average annual conditions ice-edge
periods from 40 to 100 years)25. takes the farthest westward position in the first part of

18 |
OIFP Prirazlomnaya
oil spill modeling
1

Figure 6. Examples of design hudrometeorological events

Figure 7. Cotidal maps for M2 tidal wave

| 19
Figure 8. Sea surface tidal stream ellipses
for M2 tidal wave

April. Under average conditions ice-edge goes from


40° E to 48° E at the northern boundary of southeast
part of the Barents Sea; under severe conditions ice-
edge lays outside of southeast part of the Barents Sea.
Later, as the sea clears from ice that typically happens
in May – June, ice edge moves eastward. By mid-July,
under mild conditions water area clears from ice, and
in medium conditions ice edge is located in the far
east of the area adjoining the Kara Strait. Under severe
conditions ice edge covers the area from Novaya
Zemlya to Varandey coast. Final clearance occurs as
late as in August.
From December to April concentration of ice cover in
the southeast part of the Barents Sea usually equals
9-10 points. Typically ice does not cover the whole
water area, and partial area of 7-10 point solid ice is
constantly expanding up to 70% in April. Generally for
the year the amount of broken and drift ice is much
less than the amount of solid ice. Under long-term
average annual conditions massive reduction of areas
with ice of various concentration happens in early
May – late June. In May half of the area is usually free Figure 9. Wind module at the height of 10 m based on
CFSR data from 01.01.2000 to 31.12.2009
of ice, significant areas of broken and drift ice cover

20 |
OIFP Prirazlomnaya
oil spill modeling
1

Figure 10. Wind patterns in OIFP location

approximately 10% of the entire sea. Partial acreage broken and drift ice covers 10% of the water area. Half of
of 7-10 point solid ice covers about 40% of the sea. the sea is ice-free.
Broken and drift ice is prevailing in June, small zones
Under extreme conditions ice covers about 90% of the
of solid ice survive in central or southeastern part of
water area, partial acreage of solid ice reaches almost
the sea. In early July only small areas of broken and
75%, and partial acreage of broken and drift ice is about
drift ice still exist. During spring and summer period ice
15%. Approximately 15% of the sea is free of ice.
concentration in the southeastern part of the Barents
Sea demonstrates significant year-to-year fluctuations. Depending on ice condition type in spring season,
The most significant year-to-year variability of ice consolidated ice limit can either hold the far south
concentration exhibits in May. position, practically adjoining the fast ice edge or, in
case of severe ice conditions lay to westward of Kanin
The Pechora Sea ice cover data is given in Table 327.
Peninsula. Accumulations of compacted ice in the
Under extremely mild conditions in mid-May the sea southeastern part of the Barents Sea have no stable
area covered with mainly 7-10 point solid ice amounts permanent position observed.
to about 30%. Broken and drift ice survives as isolated
Dynamic ridge formation on drift ice typically starts in
zones with partial coverage less than 5%. Approximately
December-January when ice becomes 0.3-0.5 m thick.
70% of the sea is free of ice.
In average 2-3 point ridging prevails in the ice cover
Under medium conditions ice cover equals to about 50%, Pechora region.
with partial acreage of solid ice amounts 40%, while

Property X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII


Probability, 2/100 45/100 93/100 100/100 100/100 100/100 97/100 83/100 63/100 13/100
% av / max
Ice cover, -/15 7/34 26/63 44/70 59/99 65/99 74/100 56/100 28/93 6/58
% av / max
Concentration, 9/10 9/10 10/10 10/10 10/10 10/10 9,5/10 8/10 7,5/10 3,5/10
points
(av / max)
Ridging, points -/- 1/1,5 1,5/2 2/3 2,5/3,5-4 3/4-4,5 3/5 2,5/3 2/- 1/-
(av / max)

Table 2 - Long-time average annual data


on the Pechora Sea ice cover

| 21
Under extremely mild conditions waters of the projects as well as for spill risk modeling and assessment
southeastern part of the Barents Sea clears from ice in major sea basins of the Russian Federation.
in late May, under medium conditions – during the first
These models require regional metocean data that in
decade of July, and under extreme severe conditions –
its turn call for specialized models to convert source
during the first decade of August.
information into simulation input data. Summary of the
All data on Arctic Sea ice cover obtained from satellite models is given below.
images, ship observations, ice patrol flights, weather
station observations is collected in AARI, digitized 1.4.1. SpillMod
and presented in net domain with 1.0° x 1.0° spatial SpillMod28, 29, 30 relies on basic environmental spill
resolution and time resolution of 1 week (AARI? processes (spreading, transfer and deformation caused
Smolyanitsky V.M.). Ice consolidation values were by wind and currents, spill components evaporation,
sampled in OIFP Prirazlomnaya point of location for natural dispersion and spilled oil properties modification
1999-2012 to obtain average ice consolidation values for over time). The model is based on vertically averaged
1999-2012 (Fig. 11). Navier-Stokes equations and allows performing
In appears that general warming trend in Arctic basin is necessary computations including for initial stages of
expressed in some ice condition softening in the OIFP the process, applicable to complex geometry, involving
location, as shown in Fig. 12. free and contact boundaries, and the presence of ice
cover. Model equations representing certain evolution
It comes into particular prominence in the beginning of of traditional shallow-water equations were obtained
ice season during fall months of the calendar year. under small parameter perturbation technique applied
to the initial 3-D problem where flowing inside oil layer
is described by Navier-Stokes equation system for
1.4. Numerical Simulation incompressible Newtonian fluid. Stress continuity and
Models Description kinematic conditions are established for oil-water and oil-
The following numerical simulation models were used in air interfaces, which are the required functions as well.
this study: Water fronts and limits of consolidated ice features are
• SpillMod to calculate spill traiectorry distances in natural boundaries for spill spreading. The following
open water and under given ice conditions defined by conditions can be established for modeling:
spatial distribution of ice with various concentration; • ultimate effective thickness of spill floating (typically
• OilMARS to calculate spill travel distances and spill 10 microns for light hydrocarbons);
interacting with ice in dynamic ice conditions. • control points to locate spill crossing;
These models became widely used in practical oil spill • placement of different purpose boom lines (protective,
modeling when developing OSR Plans for oil and gas deflective, oil-gathering);

Month Average
Year
XI XII I II III IV V VI VII XI-III IV-VII Year
1996/97 3 6 40 70 82 88 55 5 0 40 37 38
1997/98 7 44 66 88 93 87 77 40 13 60 54 57
1998/99 58 71 86 97 91 88 77 50 5 81 55 68
1999/00 26 19 67 60 68 53 22 <1 0 48 19 34
2000/01 11 34 39 70 85 64 31 13 <1 48 24 36
2001/02 46 36 57 82 73 62 42 16 1 45 30 38
2002/03 22 41 59 53 56 40 34 16 - 46 23 34

Table 3 - Ice cover in the southeast


part of the Barents Sea, 1996 to 2003, %

22 |
OIFP Prirazlomnaya
oil spill modeling
1

Figure 11. Average ice consolidation in OIFP


location for 1999-2000

Figure 12. Ice conditions in 1999-2012

• skimmers’ placement and efficiency. • potential spill travel limits (affected zone) for given
set of metocean situations and ultimate thickness
SpillMod complex enables to obtain the following initial
constraints;
data for each relevant metocean situations:
• distribution of ultimate (maximum) spill thickness in
• spill trajectory and form at every instant;
water areas within the affected zone;
• changes in spill hydrocarbon balance (evaporation,
• areas of spill travel risk (spill distribution limits within
natural disperion in water column, floating remainder);
the specified time periods);
• changes in spill average thickness and its distribution
• probability of water, cost and other given object
within the spill limits;
pollution within the specified time periods.
• changes in spill component content on the surface
SpillMod tools allow finding and presenting data for given
and respective density and viscosity changes.
seasons, calendar periods and for separate metocean
SpillMod data treatment allows obtaining information to situations.
assess spill travel risk:

| 23
SpillMod uses data from near-water wind intensity with conservation of mass. When the spillage reaches
and 3-D sea current speed fields reflecting diversity of the zone with 10-point consolidation of ice (fast ice belt)
possible dynamic situations and characterizing space- or coastline, its area reduces while it thickness increases
time variability of sea currents dictating spill travel. respectively.
This data was computed based on continuous series
When spill is spreading ice pollution in water openings
of weather data using global reanalysis data from
practically does not occur aside infiltration into the ice
meteorological models for prolonged periods of time. This
is insignificant. And if ice is compacted and ridged spill
approach is based on objective indication and simulation
will splash on the ice surface or go beneath the ice
of real hydrodynamic situations.
cover. The model assumes that at ice consolidation of
1.4.2. OilMARS 9.5 points and compression speed less than 0.12 m/s,
total weight of spillage mass moves beneath the ice. If
3-D oil spill model for the Arctic Seas developed compression speed exceeds 0.12 m/s, the total spillage
in AARI31 calculates oil pollution transport and mass splashes on the ice upper surface.
transformation on the sea in the result of long-lasting oil
spill incidents from fixed or traveling sources, surface Drifting ice fields can transport oil spill over long distances
and underwater propagation of oil slicks identified. effectively promoting redistribution of seawater oil
OilMARS relies on ice consolidation and drift values pollution, while cleaning pollution area and polluting ice
obtained from hydrodynamic model in operational- melt zone.
forecasting mode. It is assumed that upper ice surface is covered with
Oil spill incident is described in the model by a series of snow. Climatic data is used to define snow thickness
discrete spills – portions or spillages flowing from the and temperature. The model relies on the following
source of pollution to the sea surface at given intervals. processes: flowing over snow or ice (in the absence of
The model assumes that ice consolidation affects the snow) surface, vertical and horizontal absorption into
coverage and consequently the increase in thickness snow and vertical absorption into ice (modified Darcy
of oil spill during floating and further diffusion. Ice law-based method applies), drifting with ice field. If the
consolidation impact on evaporation and oil-in-water temperature of snow-ice cover is lower than pour point
and water-in-oil emulsion formation when exposed to of a given oil product, the model computes polluted
wind waves is considered indirectly based on reduction ice drift only.
of acreage of each spillage. In this case it is assumed Oil got beneath the ice flows and accumulates in
that wind wave impact ceases with ice consolidation cavities and pockets in the bottom of ice cover; some
exceeding 5 points. oil can fill cracks and water openings. In this case ice
Ice consolidation and drift affect spillage transport pollution process depends on ice bottom roughness and
significantly. Based on observations and retrospective topography. The more cavities and recesses the ice has
modeling results in the presence of ice cover, spill and the deeper they are, the more oil can be trapped
transport speed reduces significantly depending on in ice and the less oil flowing acreage is. This type of
ice consolidation level; and spill transport direction ice pollution is the most uncertain as the topography
deviates up to 60° of the pre-computed direction that of the bottom of the ice in operational-forecasting
does not consider ice cover. Therefore it is assumed in estimates is left unknown resulting in necessity to use
computations that spillage transfer speed and direction certain assumptions in modeling. The model relies on
depend on ice consolidation in the nearest grid points. the following processes: flowing beneath the ice (it is
assumed that the bottom of the ice is flat), drift with ice or
Calculations of spill travel in ice conditions usually assume transport under the ice.
that if ice consolidation exceeds 5 points, spill moves
together with ice. However, real oil spill observations If current speed under the ice exceeds certain limit
demonstrated that spill could move faster than drift ice. value, than oil spill will move against the ice. The model
Therefore the model assumes that if ice consolidation considers the case when oil spill can reach water-opening
exceeds 5 points the spillage will be transported at the areas, in this case the spill will be carried out from under
speed of ice drift subject to ice drift speed exceeds the the ice field and rise to the surface forming secondary
own spillage speed. pollution.
When the spillage enters the zone with higher ice The model requires multiple features of local and regional
consolidation, the spillage area is reduced respectively ice conditions be established. In this case it was made

24 |
OIFP Prirazlomnaya
oil spill modeling
1

for the particular scenarios linked to specific dates of ice close to regular ellipsoid one. Geometric characteristics
observations. consider spill propagation and transport under various
conditions that in this case are presented by equivalent
To consider ice condition dynamics the model used
wind intensity. Estimates for ideal situation of flat calm
estimate results for the Arctic Ocean obtained with 3-D
sea are given to determine ultimate spill size around
thermo-hydrodynamic model AARI–IOCM32 presented
the source. Spill length complies with the range of spill
as dynamic spatial fields or wind, current speed,
transport by the equivalent wind; the spill width is given
water temperature and salinity, ice consolidation,
according to its front side.
thickness and drift speed. Harmonic constituents
were used to estimate current tidal components. Diagrams in Fig. 13-14 show evolution of 1,500 t
Wind wave parameters are based on semi-empirical and 10,000 t (of which 2,000 t during 12 hours) spill
dependencies. geometric characteristics, respectively.
Estimated grid area of the Barents Sea was cut from the Characteristics for various oil film thickness values (1 µm
Arctic Ocean grid having spatial resolution of 7.5 marine – spill limits that can be visualized; 10 µm – maximum
miles (13. 9 x 13.9 km) and vertical resolution under thickness to use mechanical oil skimming technologies;
standard oceanographic horizons. 50 µm – thickness of relatively efficient mechanical
skimming) were computed to present more complete
picture of oil spill structure. These characteristics can
1.5. Oil spill behavior modeling and be used for OSR operation planning (in particular, spill
environmental risk assessment size as of up to 4 hours defines the opportunity of spill
localization with practical means available).
oil spill behavior is simulated for all identified metocean
situations as spill propagation paths and their We are unable to confirm the proposition made by
characteristics (spill location and size, oil weight in various HELCOM suggesting that spill major part is concentrated
states, oil physical and chemical properties, and other on 10% of its acreage33. Further researches that are
necessary parameters). Altogether there were 34,000 spill beyond the scope of this study are necessary to establish
travel scenarios in ice-free and ice periods were prepared. more accurate laws of spill mass distribution over its
Further these scenarios (for the sake of simplicity referred coverage.
to as «situations») are subject to logical and statistical
analysis in space, time and other dimensions. The results Oil Spill Weathering
are as follows: Oil spill weathering is defined as the percentage of oil
• spill propagation risk zones as waters and coast plots remaining on the surface to the amount of oil spilled. Fig.
that may be affected in specified time periods; 15 and Fig. 16 show potential range and average values
for 1,500 t and 10,000 t oil spill aeolation, respectively.
• spill impact risk zones as waters and coast plots that
may be affected with specified certainty; The diagrams above show extreme variability of spill
weathering that depends significantly on weather
• spill impact risk zones with specified degree of conditions. In particular, there are situations when with
potential pollution of waters and coasts as their sites 1,500 t of oil spilled during 3 days, all the oil disappears
that may have specified probability of pollution; from the sea surface (due to evaporation and dispersion
• spill state dynamics as dispersion curves, and certain processes) by the end of the spillage. With 10,000 t oil
other practical parameters. spill, natural purification of water area from oil spilled is
possible within 5 days, i.e. also by the end of the spillage.
Scales of access time, probability levels and pollution Such situations relate to extreme conditions with strong
rates can be set out in advance or formed based on winds and wave disturbance within the whole duration of
simulation results. oil spill from sources.
1.5.1. Oil Spill Propagation during Ice-Free Period Oil spill potential propagation zones,
waters and coast pollution risk zones
Oil Spill Spatial And Geometric Characteristics
Data that gives an insight into probability, time and spatial
Oil spill spatial and geometric characteristics (oil slick characteristics of possible oil spills for various initial data
dimensions and area) are to be defined for the initial stage is given in Fig. 17-19.
when it is possible to presume on saving configuration

| 25
Figure 13. 1,500 t and 10,000 t spill geometric
characteristics during 3 days (2,000 during 12 hours)

Areas of risks of waters polluting in ice-free period for Probability of polluting 1 km of coast within 5 days is
specified oil spill scenarios are given in Fig. 17. Risk shown in Fig. 21, within 10 days – in Fig. 22, pollution
zones are defined for oil slicks of 10 µm and 50 µm. probabilities are taken relative to 1 km of coastline.
Probabilities of waters pollution within 5 days in ice-
Maximum oil slick thickness values corresponding the
free period are shown in Fig. 18; within 10 days – in
specified oil spills are shown in Fig. 23.
Fig. 19.
When a zone with a given pollution intensity adjoins
Detailed risk zones of oil spill propagation within 24
a coast that signals the threat of similar intensity spill
hours were computed in order to identify response areas
approaching the coast.
(Fig. 20).
Estimated data comparison shows that oil spill Damage to coasts and specially
propagation risk zones are defined not so much by protected natural reservations
spill volume and intensity as by metocean conditions.
Obviously that under roughly equal coverage, pollution Figure 24 shows probabilities of damage to coasts in
levels within the zones will be logically higher for spills of ice-free period caused by spills of various duration (also
larger volumes or higher intensity. contains data for 3-day and 5-day design-basis spills). In
accordance with the calculation results the coast can be
polluted by the end on the first day. By the end of the

26 |
OIFP Prirazlomnaya
oil spill modeling
1

Figure 14. 10,000 t spill geometric characteristics during


5 days (2,000 during 12 hours)

second day the probability of damage to the coast and and 5-day spills do not show significant difference.
need for cleaning and protection measures increases
The extent of damage to the coast lines can vary
to 10% and by the end of the third day such probability
considerably and can reach 60 km. The distribution
reaches 25%.
of conditional probabilities of higher length of the area
Probabilities of damage to SPNRs caused by 3-day affected is provided in Figure 27. A significant portion of
and 5-day spills are shown in Figures 25 and 26. The spills will lead to pollution over the area of 10 to 30 km.
calculation is based on SPNR water boundary crossing
Figure 27 shows that the conditional probability of
by a spill.
pollution exceeding 40 km of coast line 10 days after a
The SPNR areas located on the islands Dolgy, Vaygach spill with a 3-day or 5-day discharge is 10% and 15%,
and Gulyaevskie Koshki demonstrate high probabilities of correspondingly. The probability is conditional as it was
damage. calculated for the oil propagation scenarios assuming
damage to Dolgy Island (see Fig. 28).
The probabilities of damage to SPNRs in case of 3-day

| 27
When assessing this factor its limited precision shall influence geometrical dimensions and weathering of
be taken into account. Actual length measured on-site spills. In ice periods the size of risk zones is significantly
can be much bigger in case of heavy indentation of reduced due to lower spill propagation speed in presence
coastlines, which is not reflected on GIS maps of the of drift ice on the sea surface and due to restrictive effect
given resolution. of land-fast ice.
Damage probabilities and length of the coast affected Areas of potential damage to basins over a 10-day period
can be influenced by considerable variations in other are shown in Figure 29. Probability of damage to basins
important factors that determine the impacts and effects over a 10-day period is shown in Figure 30.
of spills. Modeling of a selected oil spill scenario allows to
The figures clearly demonstrate that in ice periods, as
obtain data on location of coastline pollution, amount of
opposed to ice-free periods, spill propagation area is
oil on shore and its distribution over the polluted areas.
smaller and the spills do not reach fast-ice protected
Those individual characteristics of spills are calculated for
coasts within the time periods studied. At the same
each of the scenarios under study.
time ice-free or partially covered basin areas experience
1.5.2. Spill propagation in ice period higher levels of pollution as compared to ice-free periods.
In the event of changes in ice conditions a spill can be
Spill propagation in ice period has a number of specific trapped in ice, as described below as a part of analysis
features due to seasonal weather changes and presence of separate scenarios developing under specific ice
of ice in the Pechora sea basin. Both these factors conditions.

Figure 15. Ranges of 1,500 t oil spill potential weathering

Figure 16. Ranges of 10,000 t oil spill potential weathering

28 |
OIFP Prirazlomnaya
oil spill modeling
1

Figure 17. Waters pollution risk zones in ice-free period

| 29
Figure 18. Probability of waters polluting
within 5 days in ice-free period

30 |
OIFP Prirazlomnaya
oil spill modeling
1

Figure 19. Probability of waters polluting


within 10 days in ice-free period

| 31
Figure 20. Risk zones of waters pollution within
24 hours in ice-free period

32 |
OIFP Prirazlomnaya
oil spill modeling
1

Figure 21. Probability of polluting 1 km of coastline


within 5 days in ice-free period

| 33
Figure 22. Probability of polluting 1 km of coastline
within 10 days in ice-free period

34 |
OIFP Prirazlomnaya
oil spill modeling
1

Figure 23. Maximum oil slick thickness during


10 days in ice-free period

Figure 24. Probability of damage


to coasts in ice-free period

| 35
Figure 25. Probability of damage to SPNRs
in case of a 3-day spill

Figure 26. Probability of damage to SPNRs


in case of a 5-day spill

36 |
OIFP Prirazlomnaya
oil spill modeling
1

Figure 27. Probability of higher length


of coast line affected

Figure 28. Probability of damage to Dolgy Island as a


function of time after the spill

| 37
Figure 29. Areas of potential water area
damage in ice period

38 |
OIFP Prirazlomnaya
oil spill modeling
1

Figure 30. Probability of water area damage over


10 days in ice period

| 39
Evaluation of oil spill
emergency response capabilities 2

Section 2
Evaluation of oil spill
emergency response
capabilities

| 41
In the event of an oil spill in the sea environmental • determine the ranges of environmental characteristics
damage is inevitable. Spilled oil quickly becomes involved allowing for use of the OSR means planned (e.g.
in natural processes, interacts with the environment (it navigation safety, efficiency of use of technical and
flows, gets carried by currents and the wind, partially other means, etc.);
dispersed, evaporated and dissolved), and can not
• for the area of works – determine the probability of
be collected in full, even through a fastest active and
adverse conditions that limit efficiency and/or make it
flawless response. In addition, even after a short time
impossible to use the available equipment;
in the environment, physical and chemical properties of
oil get changed. In general, optimization of the planned • the resulting data are used for evaluation of response
response is ensured by comparing various response conditions;
strategies and selecting those that would result in
• simultaneously, develop data to be used in the
minimal environmental damage (e.g. Net Environmental
spill propagation model for analysis of the selected
Benefit Analysis (NEBA)). At the same time, an oil spill
scenarios.
response usually aims to collect the maximum amount
of oil spilled. Practical experience shows results can vary
considerably even with high concentrations of efforts 2.1. Equipment and technologies used
and resources. E.g. review of oil spill responses on spills
in US from 1993 to 2000 demonstrated the following
for oil spill response
distribution by efficiency of OSR operations (Fig. 31): 2.1.1. Special equipment under OSR Plan
only in 40% of cases mechanical means provided for
collection of over 50% of oil spilled, over 60% of spill The OSR Plan provides for the following special OSR
was collected in ca. 23% of cases, over 70% - in 16% of equipment listed in Tables 4-6 (according to OSR Plan
cases, over 80% - in less than 10% of cases. Synopsis).

Despite the limited data (26 cases), for such rare events The plan OSR provides for permanent presence of a
these ratios are sufficiently representative (a check against rescue and salvage vessel near the OIFP; this role is
the official database of the U.S. Government showed that performed by a multifunctional icebreaking supply vessel.
over the period from 2002 to 2010 there were 50 cases For appearance of the vessels used see Figure 32.
of oil spills of more than 1 m3 of which 10 cases had a 2.1.2. Response technologies
volume of more than 35 m3). Obviously, actual response and conditions of their use
results are often far from those anticipated while planning.
The available OSR Plan materials do not contain
Spill response capabilities were assessed using the
information about applied oil spill response technologies.
following procedure:

Figure 31. OSR operations efficiency statistics34

42 |
Evaluation of oil spill
emergency response capabilities 2

Judging by the planned list of special OSR equipment the


main oil spill response technologies are:
• in the open sea – a duty rescue and salvage vessel
supported by a boom powerboat will set booms in
order to localize the spill or trap a part of it; then a high
capacity Free Floating Offshore oleophilic skimmer will
collect the oil from the trap formed by the boom;
• in coastal waters – setting of protection or deflection
booms and oil collection with low capacity oleophilic
skimmers;
• in ice conditions – oil collection from ice-free areas
with Arctic Skimmer.
Figure 32. “Vladislav Strizhov”
These technologies are considered in this document and “Yury Topchev” vessels
as the main technologies and are included in spill
propagation models for analysis.
under which the booms may lose their holding
Booms capacity and the trapped oil may escape. The main
It is well known that the use of floating booms is influencing factors are visibility during the operations,
considerably limited by environmental conditions, currents and wind.

Table 4 - Booms

Boom type Length, m Total height, mm Location

Marine inflatable boom 1,200 1,500 Each supply vessel carries 400 m of booms, 400 m of booms
are stored in a container at OIFP

Permanent buoyancy 2,000 1,000 Stored at the OSR base in Murmansk. In case of oil spill
port booms emergency the booms are delivered to the spill site by a supply
vessel within 23 days. Used in ice-free periods.

Coast isolating booms 300 500 Stored at the OSR base in Murmansk. In case of oil spill
emergency the booms are delivered to the spill site by a supply
vessel within 2-3 days. Used in ice-free periods.

Table 5 - Skimmers

Collection capacity,
Skimmer type Qty, pcs Planned location
m3/h
Brush Minimax 10 (Lamor 10 6 Varandey coastal base –3 pcs; 1 pc on each supply
Company) (foroil collection in vessel; 1 pc placed on the platform.
hard-to-reach places).
Free Floating Offshore (FFO) 200 2 During ice-free period – onboard a supply vessel,
(for oil collection offshore) in winter the skimmer is stored at the OSR base in
Murmansk. If needed, the skimmer is delivered to the
spill area by a supply vessel.
Arctic skimmer (oil collection in 70 2 In winter is placed onboard a supply vessel. During
ice conditions) ice-free period the skimmer is stored at the OSR base
in Murmansk.

| 43
Table 6 - Water-borne vehicles

Description Characteristics Package, application, location Qty, pcs

Supply vessel Deadweight 3,800 t Speed at Year-round emergency and rescue readiness at 2
8.00 m draft – 15 knots OIFP is ensured by multipurpose supply ships of the
corresponding ice class, each carrying 3 skimmers
Ice 1.5 m, snow 70 cm – 2 knots
with power units (Minimax 10 and FFO skimmer (in
Ice 0.8 m – 10.0 knots ice-free period), Arctic skimmer (in ice period)), and
a set of floating booms (400 m long). Function: boom
deployment, oil collection activities, oil dredging. Each
supply vessel also carries tanks for temporary storage
of collected oil with total capacity of 1,000 m3 and a
dispersion medium application device.

High-speed Length ~ 10 m, draft ~1 m Delivery of coast-isolating and permanent buoyancy 2


boom powerboat booms and their deployment for oil spill deviation
(onboard the and protection of peculiarly sensitive coasts. Located
supply vessel) onboard a supply vessel.

Work boat Length 12.98 m, width 3.6 m, Personnel and equipment delivery to hard-to-reach 2
(Sever-7) draft 1.03 m, speed 8 knots, coast areas, oil collection at shallow waters. Rented
deadweight 2 t when necessary.

The visibility limitations are related not to the booms where SWHbcr is the critical value of significant wave
themselves, but to the conditions of their use: inaccurate height, at which the oil starts flowing through the boom,
positioning of the booms against the oil spill can lead to SHWbl is the limit value of significant wave height in
oil leaks aside the booms. In this research we assumed excess of which the booms are totally inefficient.
that at day time booms can be positioned accurately, in
the dusk the positioning accuracy decreases by 50% and ⎧1, (ud + uc ) n < ubcr
at night it does not exceed 10%. ⎪
⎪ (u + uc ) n − ubcr
The envisaged booms’ full height in deflated state is Bcur = ⎨1 − d , ubcr ≤ (ud + uc ) n < ubl  
1,500 mm, in deployed state height below water is 700 ⎪ ubl − ubcr
mm, height above water is 500 mm. ⎪
⎩0, (ud + uc ) n ≥ ubl
Oil containment efficiency depends, mainly, on the wave
height and current speed and is parameterized as follows:
where ubcr , ubl are the critical and limit values of the current
Eb = Bwave .B cur
speed, at which the oil starts flowing through the boom
and the boom becomes totally inefficient, correspondingly.
The relative velocity of flow created by marine currents
where the factors are empirical dependences of the oil or movement of the boom during towing is measured
containment efficiency on the wave height and current by the component perpendicular to the line of booms.
speed. Standard boom tests35 include determining the velocity of
the first oil penetration and the velocity of complete loss
The simplest parameterization of those processes takes
of containment capacity. These parameters depend on
the following form:
the boom design, but, unfortunately, are not included in
⎧1, SWH < SWH bcr manufacturers’ specifications. Currently, it is assumed36
⎪ that the relative velocity of flow at the first passage of oil
⎪ SWH − SWH bcr
Bwave = ⎨1 − , SWH bcr ≤ SWH < SWH bl   through booms of all types does not exceed 0.5 m/s.
⎪ SWH l − SWH bcr The velocity of total loss of containment is assumed as
⎪
⎩0, SWH ≥ SWH bl 0.7 m/s. In a range from 0.5 m/s to 0.7 m/s (0% and
100% penetration, respectively) the portion of leaking

44 |
Evaluation of oil spill
emergency response capabilities 2

oil is considered to be linearly dependent on the flow where hcr_sc is the critical oil film thickness after which the
velocity. Some boom configurations take into account skimmer system performance is limited, hl_sc is the limit
the flow angle along the booms, so that the portion value after which the skimmer system performance is
of leaking oil varies along the boom line. Shorter and zero.
more rigid boom lines used in autonomous oil collecting
Such dependences are adopted in the Russian practice37
systems demonstrate lower oil penetration values: in this
(see Figure 33), although not specified in respect of
case more importance is given to maintaining the correct
particular types and models of equipment.
course of the vessel in relation to the spill and the film
thickness of the spill, in which the ship is moving, rather Trawl systems
than accuracy of the course of the vessel.
This study covers additional response capability – oil trawl
Skimmers systems using short boom lines fixed along the board of
the oil collecting vessel, and a skimmer to lift aboard the
In this research we assumed that oleophilic skimmers
oil captured by the trawl. Such a system is not intended
collecting the oil contained by the booms operate to their
for spill containment, and its use is aimed at oil collection
rated performance (250 m3/h for Free Floating Offshore
maximization. The advantage of the system consists
skimmer). This suggests that the skimmer can always be
in the possibility of flexible vessel control allowing to
set at a point with a sufficient oil film thickness.
direct it to the most massive part of the oil spill (which is
Performance of skimmers used in autonomous oil spill important in shifting currents) and system performance
collection systems depends on the spill thickness and at higher speed of trawling (oil escape through the
the working width of the mounted boom line. booms is not considered to be critical if high oil collection
performance is ensured, modern systems allow for
If OSR operations involve a skimmer or an oil spill
trawling speed of up to 4 knots). Performance of such
collection vessel, the flow of oil from the oil slick in the
system depends on the width of spill capture, speed of oil
area of skimmer system operation is parameterized as:
collecting vessel and oil film thickness. The limiting factors
Qsc = P100 ⋅ Esc ( SWH , h)   are the performance of oil collecting elements of the
skimmer and of the pump system delivering the collected
where P100 is the rated capacity of the skimmer oil from the skimmer to the vessel. A standard scheme
system, Esc (SWH, h) is performance in specific for assessing a trawl system performance is provided in
hydrometeorological conditions and as a function of oil Figure 34.
film thickness.

Esc = Pwave ⋅ Ph 2.2. Assessment of oil spill response


  conditions in the Pechora Sea
⎧1, SWH < SWH cr _ sc As a general rule, in development of OSR plans the
⎪
⎪ SWH − SWH cr _ sc response conditions are described, primarily, as
Pwave = ⎨1 − , SWH cr _ sc ≤ SWH < SWH l _ sc   more or less complete data and their impact on the
⎪ SWH l − SWH cr _ sc implementation of the plan is usually not investigated.
⎪0, SWH ≥ SWH
⎩ l _ sc Thus, it is tacitly assumed that the composition and
characteristics of the manpower and resources meet the
where SWHcr_sc is the critical wave height, after which the natural and other environmental conditions during the
skimmer system efficiency decreases, SHWl_sc is the limit response.
wave height after which the skimmer is inefficient.
The composition and content of required and provided
data are regulated in a very general way as a requirement
⎧1, h > hcr _ sc to include in the plan the sections on “Geographical,
⎪ navigational and hydrological characteristics of the
⎪ h −h territory” and “Hydrometeorological and environmental
Ph = ⎨1 − cr _ sc , hl _ sc ≤ h < hsr _ sc  
characteristics of the area”.
⎪ h cr _ sc − hl _ lc This section describes and assesses the main
⎪0, h < h characteristics of response conditions that are considered
⎩ l _ sc unfavorable for spill response in the Pechora Sea. It shall

| 45
Figure 33. Dependences of oil collection
performance at sea

Figure 34. Diagram for assessing performance


of a trawl oil-collecting system

46 |
Evaluation of oil spill
emergency response capabilities 2

безледный период ледовый период

Figure 35. Probability of exceeding the current velocity


thresholds in the area of Prirazlomnoye Oil Field

Figure 36. Probability of exceeding the wind speed


thresholds in the OIFP area

be noted that a number of similar studies have been characteristics of the wind speed at the OIFP installation
conducted recently38. area are shown in Figure 36.

2.2.1. Hydrometeorological conditions From these data it follows that in the ice-free period the
probability of exceeding the wind speed of 8 m/s is more
Hydrometeorological conditions are assessed for the than 40%, the wind speed of 10 m/s is exceeded in 20%
OIFP location point, where, primarily, the main OSR of cases, and the critical speed of 15 m/s, that makes it
operations will be conducted, and for the Pechora Sea practically impossible to use booms, is observed in 3-4%
basin, where the spills will propagate. of cases. It means that in the corresponding percentage
Local conditions at OIFP area of spill events response operations may be inefficient or
totally impossible. In the ice period the wind speed of 10
Statistical characteristics of the speed of surface current m/s or more is observed in ca. 15% of all cases.
at the OIFP installation area are shown in Figure 35.
Regional conditions of the Pechora Sea
Exceeding of the critical current velocity of 0.5 m/s is
typical for 4% of time of the ice-free period. During the Probability fields for exceeding the specified wind speeds
ice period current velocities are much lower. Statistical in the Pechora Sea are shown in Figure 37. The wave

| 47
Figure 37. Probability fields for exceeding the wind speed
thresholds in the Pechora Sea

height values correspond to the significant wave height. of currents, tides, subgrid-scale islands and ice cover
can also be taken into consideration. The model allows
Probability fields for exceeding the specified significant
constructing nested grids with variable resolution in
wave heights in the Pechora Sea basin are shown in
different areas and automatic binding of calculations on
Figure 36.
the area boundaries.
Significant wave height (SWH) distribution function
Since the development of wind waves in an area depends
was based on the wind-wave calculation using the
not only on local wind conditions, but also on distribution
spectral model WaveWatch III version 3.1439, a third-
of wave energy from remote areas, for proper reflection of
generation grid model solving the balance equation of
wave characteristics in the given area the calculations for
the spectral wave action in the approximation of phase
the model WaveWatch III were performed on a grid 0.5°
averaging. The model takes into account the main wave
x 0.5°, covering the global area, with a nested grid 10
processes influenced by the wind, energy redistribution
km x 10 km, covering the Barents sea, including the area
in the spectrum due to nonlinear interactions, processes
under study λ = 50-60° E, ϕ = 68-70° N. The calculation
of wave attenuation due to bottom friction, collapse,
results shown in Figure 38 indicate that with a certain
and energy scattering on bottom irregularities. Effects

48 |
Evaluation of oil spill
emergency response capabilities 2

2,5 м 3,0 м

Figure 38. Probability fields for exceeding the significant


wave heights in the Pechora Sea

probability the area adjacent and surrounding the OIFP will inevitably lead to loss of previously contained oil and
may experience critical wave conditions rendering oil spill waste of the time spent for this operation. Under these
response measures ineffective or impossible. conditions coordinated maneuvers of boom laying boats
and the oil collecting vessel with a floating skimmer
The combination of water circulation, tidal and wind
aimed at spill confinement with retaining of the operating
currents characteristic of the Pechora Sea leads to
position of the connected skimmer seem difficult and
formation of water areas with high flow velocity. Figure
almost impossible.
39 shows areas with notably higher probabilities of
critical flow velocities. This means that in the event of an These circumstances can considerably complicate some
oil spill in these areas, there is a high probability of their OSR operations:
confinement.
• First, spill source localization becomes nearly
The Pechora Sea is characterized by intense and often impossible, since any booms will fail due to changing
rapidly changing tidal currents. They can complicate currents causing inevitable loss of confinement;
spill response in the high seas, and especially in coastal
• Second, accumulation of large quantities of oil in
areas. Figure 40 shows successive positions of booms
the boom traps becomes inexpedient. In fact, the
with fixed ends for one series of actually observed
only reasonable strategy consists in rapid collection
hydrometeorological situations.
of the contained oil before critical changes in boom
Rapid (in ca. 2 hours) changes in the curvature and configuration;
position of the boom line even in low wind conditions

| 49
Figure 39. Probability fields for exceeding the
specified current velocities in the Pechora Sea

• Third, securely moored coastal booms can only some extent through parallel operation of two or more oil-
perform a protective function in the place of their collecting barriers, intercepting the spill alternately.
installation and can not be expected to confine oil for
its collection, 2.2.2. Astronomical conditions

Such specifics of the area of OSR operations are The high-latitude OIFP will experience significant
difficult to quantify. Their impact on the efficiency of OSR variations of day length and of possible hours of oil spill
operations may be identified and evaluated only when response operations. Figure 41 shows the changes
modeling specific situations. in day length, civil twilight and possible working hours
during the year.
As for the creation of intercepting booms, based on the
maximum capacity of the skimmer of 250 m3/hr, in these It is assumed that OSR operations can be conducted
conditions, the expected maximum one-time amount of with full efficiency during daylight hours, with limited
oil to be accumulated, retained and rapidly collected from efficiency at twilight and are severely limited, up to
the booms trap will not exceed 200-250 tons (specific suspension, at night.
values ​​can be determined via simulation) regardless of the 2.2.3. Response efficiency limitations
amount of oil spilled. After recovery of this amount of oil
onboard the oil collecting vessel, the oil-collecting barrier The above local and regional conditions can be combined
may be reused after an appropriate maneuver and, in the and act together. For example, in the daytime, when there
case of large spills, such re-use is even expected. are no visibility restrictions, limitations can be imposed by
the current velocity and wind speed. Night time limitations
The necessary breaks in active OSR operations will lead to may be further increased by deteriorating meteorological
response gaps, during which the spill will flow and spread conditions, etc. Known approaches40 do not provide
freely. The corresponding losses may be compensated to methods for comprehensive evaluation of OSR

50 |
Evaluation of oil spill
emergency response capabilities 2

Figure 40. Boom line behavior under the influence


of wind and currents

| 51
Figure 41. Annual changes in astronomical
conditions at OIFP latitude

operations, taking into account all influencing factors. In pollution of specially protected natural reservations.
this study, we use is a simplified method of assessment
OSR operations are modeled with use of means
that consists in multiplying individual performance
stipulated by the OSR Plan. The type of operations
indicators for different response periods under particular
is determined on the basis of the adopted response
scenarios and calculating the mean product for the entire
practices, the time of beginning of each operation – on
period of response.
the basis of its feasibility (e.g., onset of daylight), and the
Some response limitations cannot be calculated in place of each operation – by criterion of maximum oil
advance, without the data on the spill state in the local collection. This criterion is verified by modeling through
area of response, variability of meteorological situations the end of the operation. If the result is unsatisfactory
and (this applies to calculation of tidal currents) and (for example, a considerable part of the spill passed the
specific OSR operations (for example, place and booms), a new location is selected and the modeling
accuracy of boom setting or spill trawling). In such cases, is restarted. After several iterations the best result is
the efficiency of OSR operations may be determined recorded and the situation is modeled to the moment,
by results of spill and OSR modeling under specific when the next operation is feasible (for example, a
scenarios. previously occupied or newly delivered oil collecting
barrier becomes available). Such replays somewhat
idealize the actual capabilities and are performed to
2.3. Analysis of individual spill simulate rational management of OSR operations.
scenarios, response conditions and Another idealization is introduced in respect of the data
OSR operations on possible development of the situation: it is assumed
that the operation management has an accurate forecast
Spill scenarios and OSR operations are analyzed for (e.g., the time and place of spill approach to the shore
specific meteorological situations, which represent are known in advance). It is suggested that this method
situations that were actually observed in the past. In allows to obtain a close to optimal result to prevent or
accordance with the objectives of this study, for the limit pollution of the SPNRs.
detailed analysis we selected situations dangerous by

52 |
Evaluation of oil spill
emergency response capabilities 2

The result of actual response may be worse due to • description of response options and results of their
uncertainty of the situation and potential human errors, application;
however, the conclusion on possibility of protection or
• comparison of situation development with and without
maximum possible protection is made on the basis of the
response operations in terms of oil balance and
optimized use of available manpower and resources.
damage to coasts.
2.3.1. Ice-free period For each scenario we provide the resulting environmental
The spill scenarios are analyzed with the following effect in the form of environmental impact reduction.
assumptions: By results of scenario consideration we provide
• the hydrometeorological situations were selected from conclusions on effectiveness of the OSR system in terms
actually observed past situations corresponding to of protection of coastlines of specially protected natural
specific dates and times of the day; reservations and opportunities for improvement and/or
further response beyond the first day.
• astronomical and hydrometeorological conditions
in which spills take place were jointly analyzed and Protection of Dolgy Island, 10,000 t spill
described in detail and taken into account;
An emergency involving a loaded crude carrier accident
• the readiness of manpower and resources was near OIFP and a spill of 10,000 t of oil during 5 days
ensured as stipulated by the OSR Plan; with discharge of 20% of the spill in the first 12 hours.
Estimated spill start time 10:00 p.m. (Greenwich,
• close-to-optimal options were selected in each
hereinafter UTC) or 01:00 a.m. local time. The
particular case of use of manpower and resources.
hydrometeorological conditions under this scenario
Involvement of additional capabilities was considered correspond to the hydrometeorological situation of
only to the extent available for mobilization during the first October 06, 2010 that imposed a threat to Dolgy Island.
day (independent oil collection system with lateral trawls, The possible total length of damage to the coastlines
working width 30 m, and skimmer capacity up to 100 under this scenario is close to the maximum length of all
m3/h). Involvement of other capabilities requires additional the scenarios considered.
vessels that can be mobilized in case of operations
Duration of daylight at this time of year is about 12 hours
control escalation to the regional or federal level. We have
including the civil twilight. Start of civil twilight - 04:47
studied the following scenarios:
a.m., sunrise - 05:46 a.m., sunset 04:11 p.m, end of civil
10,000 t oil spill during 5 days (crude carrier accident with twilight - 05:10 p.m. (all – local time).
a risk of damage to Dolgy Island) in fall season;
The hydrometeorological conditions are characterized
10,000 t oil spill during 5 days (crude carrier accident by variable speeds and directions of wind and
with a risk of damage to Gulyaevskie Koshki Islands) in currents. The dynamics of astronomical and
summer season; hydrometeorological conditions under this scenario is
shown below in Figure 42.
1,500 t oil spill during 3 days (blowout with a risk of
damage to Dolgy Island) in fall season. The initial astronomical conditions are somewhat
unfavorable: time before civil twilight - 4 hours, allowing
To compare the results at different spill volumes,
for observance of the standard spill containment time of 4
hydrometeorological conditions in the first and the third
hours after the spill start.
scenarios are the same.
Wind data are taken for the spill propagation area,
When considering these scenarios, it is assumed that the
average wind speed is 8.4 m/s. Taken into account the
main purpose of the response is to protect the specially
intense tidal phenomena characteristic of the area, the
protected natural reservations. Secondary criteria include
data on currents are considered for the three points:
maximization of oil collection and minimization of the
near the source, at the spill propagation front and at its
collection time. Introduction of these secondary criteria
nominal geometrical center.
corresponds to the objective of reducing the water pollution
with dispersed oil and air pollution with hydrocarbon The evolution of the oil spill and wind speed for the
vapors. For each of the scenarios modeled we provide: scenario with free flow of the 10,000 t spill is shown in
Figure 43.
• spill dynamics in case of free flow during the 5 days
following its start; Intense spill weathering is observed during its spread.

| 53
Figure 42. Dynamics of astronomical and
hydrometeorological conditions

54 |
Evaluation of oil spill
emergency response capabilities 2

Figure 43. Oil spill evolution under the scenario with


free flow of 10,000 t spill

Figure 44. Dynamics of boom applicability


and efficiency windows

| 55
By the end of the accounting period 5,793 tons can be is estimated at 40%. As already noted above, an additional
dispersed, 1,883 tons will evaporate, 2,323 tons will complicating factor is the limitation of boom stability time
remain, including 1,874 tons on the sea surface and due to tidal cycles that change the direction of currents.
449 tons washed ashore. The total length of coastline
In general, taking into account the overlapping limitations
damaged is 58 km. The oil washing ashore (Dolgy Island)
the response conditions in this situation are quite
takes place 44 hours after the spill start.
complicated.
Wind conditions during the response are moderately
As in the beginning the amount of oil spilled and the spill
favorable, average wind speed over 6 hours after the
duration can be uncertain, we assumed the standard
spill start is below 7 m/s, over 5 days – 8.4 m/s. Adverse
initial response under this scenario with attempts to
conditions (wind speed exceeding 10 m/s) occur at
confine the spill by setting a U-shaped oil barrier in front
intervals 11-19 and 35-56 hours after the spill start. The
of the spreading spill.
most favorable is the period 60-90 hours after the spill
start. The current velocities during the response are Early response possibility is assumed as soon as possible
variable with sharp periodic increases in the velocities subject to the visibility conditions: 2.5 hours after the spill
and changes of flow directions. In some cases, adverse start (in accordance with the standard and OSR Plan –
hydrological and favorable meteorological conditions up to 4 hours) with laying of the boom line carried by the
overlap. For example, high (greater than 0.4 m/sec) rescue and salvage vessel on duty. At that time, given
current velocities near OIFP are observed at intervals of the observed wind of ca. 8 m/s, the total spill front width
12-16 hours, 36-42 hours, 49-52 hours, 62-65 hours is from 200 to 300 m, the front width with film thickness
after the spill start. exceeding 0.05 mm is from 50 to 200 m.
Overlapping adverse factors complicate spill confinement Setting of a 500 m boom line (500 m length is selected
and response. Dynamics of integral boom efficiency as the maximum boom line length that can be towed by
including all factors under this scenario is shown in Figure two vessels41, the boom line length under the OSR Plan
44, that, for clarity, also shows light conditions. It is is 400 m) at a distance of ca. 4,700 m from the source
conditionally assumed that at night the boom efficiency allows to confine only 33 t of oil, as the plume is rapidly
does not exceed 10%. drifted by the tidal currents, and maneuvering ability of a
system consisting of 2 vessels and 500 meters of booms
Distribution of the boom application time for various
is considered to be limited. The resulting situations are
efficiency levels is shown in Figure 45.
shown in Figure 46.
The data show that under this scenario the windows for
Attempts were made to choose a better boom
high-efficiency use of the booms constitute 15% of time,
position and configuration by modeling. No remarkable
and over 50% efficiency of the booms can be achieved in
improvement was achieved; formally, a better result (up to
50% of time. The mean boom performance over the 5 days

Figure 45. Boom application time distribution

56 |
Evaluation of oil spill
emergency response capabilities 2

50 tons confinement) was obtained, but with an unstable manpower and resources may be required. The closest
boom configuration (see Figure 47) with the risk of oil spill in terms of distance and time of mobilization are the
in case of barrier deformation. capabilities kept on rescue and salvage duty near the
Varandey terminal. It is suggested, that a carrier with a
The main reason for low efficiency of the initial response
trawl system can be sent for OSR operations near the
is the drift of the spill front due to changing hydro-
OIFP; such carrier can approach the spill front and start
meteorological conditions (mainly, tidal currents) and the
trawling 6 hours after the spill start. Its work is modeled
remoteness of the response (intercept) site from the spill
on the basis of the assumption that the vessel moves
source. Note also, that the response takes place 2 hours
along the plume center towards the OIFP during 5-6
after the spill start, at dawn time in restricted visibility
hours, and upon approaching the platform it makes
and, in practice, it would be difficult to determine the
a turn and follows the spill tail towards Dolgy Island.
optimal position. Under this response option (spill front
The trawling speed is assumed equal to 1 knot. On
containment) the situation can not be much improved
the second day the collection rate falls due to adverse
even by setting of a second boom line. In accordance
meteorological conditions and lower spill source intensity.
with the OSR Plan this line is located at the OIFP, and
Under this scenario the total amount of oil collected by an
its mobilization, delivery and deployment on site would
individual vessel is 225 tons.
require 8-10 hours. It is assumed that a decision can be
made and implemented to lay an intercepting boom line The series of situational plans corresponding to the
along the oil spill tail at the first opportunity and as closely response measures is provided in Figure 48.
to the source as possible. At relatively high wind speeds
Combination of the response capabilities used allowed
of 6-7 m/s preventing high concentrations of hydrocarbon
obtaining results shown in Figure 49, that also shows
vapors in the surface layer, it is believed that this can be
reference data in absence of response.
done at a distance of about 750 meters from the accident
site within 4 hours after the spill start subject to sufficient Table 7 compares free flowing of the spill with the
visibility at the wind speed around 7 m/s with a tendency situation after spill response 24 hours and 48 hours after
to increase. The full spill width by that time is from 300 the spill start.
to 400 m, width of the more massive part is from 50
The above data show that the conducted operations
to 200 m. Such boom line provides for confinement of
affect not only the quantity of oil collected, but also result
about 263 tons of oil. Note that a random, but favorable
in some reduction and redistribution of impacts on the
feature of this operation was its coincidence with the
environment during the accounted time interval, i.e.
change in the tidal currents; this allowed to perform the
pollution of marine waters due to oil dispersion and of air
containment operations twice with 4 hour interval, which
due to evaporation of hydrocarbons. That results from
resulted in 124 and 139 tons of oil. It is assumed that all
oil redistribution on the sea surface caused by oil spill
the confined oil can be collected by a skimmer carried
response means.
by the rescue and salvage vessel in accordance with the
OSR Plan. Additional measure under this scenario can include
arrangements for coast protection. The series of graphs
Further containment tactics may include resetting of the
shows that pollution of the Dolgy Island mainly occurs
existing boom line along the spill tail in its new location.
during the third day after the spill start (then the spill
Such repeated operation is possible 2 hours after plume drifts to the north), and this pollution is primarily
completion of the previous operation and can be due to the part of the spill, which was not stopped during
completed before the twilight on the same day. However, the first day of response. Interception and collection of
by the end of the day the wind speed increases to this part of the spill in the sea is impossible because of
exceed 11 m/s, which lowers the efficiency of the the large size and the small thickness of the oil film, as
repeated boom setting. well as due to deterioration of meteorological conditions
starting from the middle of the second day and continuing
These operations can be performed using the manpower
throughout the day.
and resources of the first level of response consisting of
two vessels and a boom boat, but that’s the maximum The expected effect of this can not be significant, since
that can be made under the OSR Plan. the spill reaching the shore will have a small oil film
thickness and sufficiently wide front (in the model the
It is assumed that as the situation develops the severity of
pollution reached the coast of Dolgy Island in 44 hours
the accident becomes clearer, the spill can be escalated
and almost simultaneously in two places, see Figure 50).
to the regional and, potentially, federal level and additional

| 57
1 hour 2 hours

3 hours 4 hours

3 hours (scale) 4 hours (scale)

Figure 46. Situational plans


(response started 2 hours after the spill)

58 |
Evaluation of oil spill
emergency response capabilities 2

Figure 47. Boom positioning option (response


started 2 hours after the spill)

The model of this operation was based on the following of a continuous protective boom line and/or removal
assumptions: and rapid relocation of moored booms along the coast
following the spill drift is not feasible. Apparently, the
• the coast protection is organized in the southern area
most appropriate strategy is to protect some most
of coastal damage (see Figure 49);
vulnerable parts of the coast selected earlier to the extent
• the time and place of spill propagation to the coast of possible damage on the basis of detailed maps of
can be forecasted with sufficient accuracy; environmental sensitivity and sufficiently reliable forecast
of further spill propagation.
• the rescue and salvage unit has up to 2,000 meters of
coastal booms; It can be suggested that by the end of the first day the
accident severity and the emerging situation will be fully
• the protective booms shall be moored to resist the
assessed, the spill will be finally classified as a federal
strong coastal currents;
emergency and the control of OSR operations will be
• the required assets, including small vessels, can be escalated to the appropriate level. It is believed that from
delivered to the work site in time. the second day, engagement and commissioning of
Figure 51 shows the resulting situation. assets and resources will be performed in accordance
with the regional and federal OSR Plans that are not
The amount of oil that accumulated at the 2,000 m line included in the scope of this paper.
of protective booms and that can potentially be collected
is 9.3 tons. This area of the coast is protected, but the Probably, by that time the measures intended to stop the
remaining spill drifts along the coast. If spare coastal emergency oil spill will give some results. Nevertheless,
booms are available they can be used to intercept the active OSR operations shall be continued. Figure 53
spill several times while it drifts along the coast, but such compares the spill dynamics in case of free propagation
operation is unlikely to have high efficiency. and in case of response.

The response allowed to reduce pollution of the coasts Table 8 compares the situation in case of free
of Dolgy Island and the adjacent islands. Their state with propagation and in case of spill response 48 hours and
and without the response (free propagation of the spill) 120 hours after the spill start. The Table shows that there
are shown in Figure 52. is no significant decrease in pollution of the coasts of
Dolgy Island even in case of significant increase in the
The main reason for the wide distribution of pollution amount of oil collected (2 days after the spill the oil that
along the coast is the variability of currents that was not collected earlier reaches the coast).
periodically move the pollution coming from the sea
and points of discharge in the meridian directions. In Nevertheless, there are some response reserves to
this and other similar situations, full protection of the achieve the secondary criteria, i.e. to maximize the
coast of Dolgy Island is hardly possible, as deployment amount of oil collected. In particular, intercepting booms

| 59
4 8 12

16 20 24

28 32 36

40 44 48

52 56 60

60 |
Evaluation of oil spill
emergency response capabilities 2

64 68 72

78 80 84

88 92 96

100 104 108

112 116 120

Figure 48. Series of spill spread layouts


for a 5-day period

| 61
Figure 49. Estimated response results after 48 hours

Table 7 - Comparison of response results

Oil spill state Oil weight, t


24 hours 48 hours
free flow response +/- free flow response +/-

Dispersed 838 671 -167 3147 2693 -454


Evaporated 441 403 -38 803 758 -45
Collected by trawling - 176 191
Confined and collected - 263 279
Remaining 1610 1378 -232 721 752 31
washed ashore 0 0 0 39 26 -13
on the sea surface 1610 1378 -232 682 726 44

Total impact -437 -468


(dispersed + evaporated + remaining)

62 |
Evaluation of oil spill
emergency response capabilities 2

Figure 50. Spill approach to the coast


of Dolgy Island (44 hours after the spill start)

42 hours 43 hours

44 hours 45 hours
Figure 51. Modeling the operations
for protecting the coast of Dolgy Island

| 63
can be duplicated at the source, which can ensure about ballast water treatment system.
the same performance level of around 120 tons per
Possibilities of a prolonged response are demonstrated in
setting and 240 tons per day. This will require mobilization
the scenario with a 10,000 tons oil spill having the same
(e.g., withdrawal from a trip) of a second multipurpose
parameters but occurring under different meteorological
rescue and salvage vessel with a second boom line along
conditions that do not allow for a rapid response at the
with vessels that can be brought on-site (three vessels
initial stage (wind speed exceeding 15 m/s during the first
per one oil collecting barrier and one additional vessel
24 hours). The spill evolution is shown in figure 54.
for shuttle transportation of oil collected. It is universally
assumed that the collected oil can be received by the Under this scenario dating from summer 2010 the spill
OIFP Prirazlomnays for treatment using the reservoir and reaches Dolgy Island in 18 hours and, in absence of

Figure 52. Modeling the operations


for protecting the coast of Dolgy Island

Figure 53. Spill state dynamics


during response

64 |
Evaluation of oil spill
emergency response capabilities 2

Table 8 - Comparison of response results


Oil weight, t
Oil spill state
48 hours 120 hours
free flow response +/- free flow response +/-
Dispersed 3,147 2,693 -454 5,793 5,021 -772
Evaporated 803 758 -45 1,883 1,752 -131
Collected by trawling 191 225
Confined and collected 279 825
Remaining 721 752 31 2,323 2,183 -140
washed ashore 39 26 -13 449 359 -90
on the sea surface 682 726 44 1,874 1,824 -50
Total impact -437 -1043
(dispersed + evaporated + remaining)

response, leads to discharge of 187 tons of oil onshore natural reservations we considered a scenario with a spill
(in this case a more rapid washing ashore causes less of 10,000 tons of oil based on the situation observed on
pollution due to intensive spill weathering). August 16, 2011 and causing damage to Gulyaevskie
Koshki islands. There are no nautical twilight at this time
In the first 24 hours the spill experiences strong
and OSR operations can be carried out around the clock.
dispersion and evaporation, therefore in 24 hours only
The hydrometeorological situation is quite favorable; the
250 tons of the total 2,900 tons spilled over this period
average wind speed over a period of 5 days is 6.7 m/s
remain on the sea surface. The spill dynamics taking into
without big variations. The spill dynamics in this situation
account the response is shown in Figure 55 containing
is shown in Figure 56.
reference spill state in absence of response.
Under this scenario the coast is reached in 55 hours after
The early response did not give any effect due to oil
the start of the spill. The total coast pollution amounts to
penetration through the boom line. The boom setting
757 tons.
produced the first limited result only by the 26th hour
after the spill start. The first successful boom setting The spill location and configuration 120 hours after its
became possible only 32 hours after the spill start. In start is shown in Figure 57.
total, 12 boom settings allowed to confine and collect
The selected response tactics is similar to that under
1,147 tons of oil (no light limitations apply during this
the previous scenario: the intercepting boom line is set
season). The trawl system operations became efficient
at 500-1,000 m along the spill plume to accumulate the
only in the beginning of the second day and allowed
oil for its further collection; then it is relocated with 6-7
to collect 405 tons of oil. By the end of the fifth day
hour intervals depending on the actual position of the spill
2,890 tons of oil remain on the sea surface (3,870 tons
plume. In the period 7-16 hours after the spill start the
without the response), 3,757 tons of oil get dispersed
wind speed increased to over 9 m/s and the booms were
during this period (4,190 tons without the response)
inefficient. Due to periodical nature of currents under this
and 1,324 tons get evaporated (1,750 tons without the
scenario in some cases no boom relocation is necessary,
response). These operations had practically no effect on
it can stay in the same position for oil collection with the
the amount of coastal pollution of the island that could
same interval after the next passage of the oil plume.
only be decreased by 7 tons, which is within the accuracy
Starting from the 7th hour the scenario provides for
allowance of the initial assumptions and modeling errors.
engagement of an autonomous oil collecting system
Protection of Gulyaevskie Koshki islands, performing trawling along the spill tail. The result after 5
10,000 ton spill days is as follows:
To test the envisaged spill response tactics in case • 2,356 tons of oil confined and collected with use of
of long duration spills and verify the conclusions on booms and skimmers;
limitations concerning protection of specially protected

| 65
4 hours 20 hours

48 hours 72 hours

120 hours

Figure 54. Dynamics of spill evolution under adverse


conditions at the initial stage

66 |
Evaluation of oil spill
emergency response capabilities 2

Figure 55. Spill dynamics with rapid washing


ashore the Dolgy Island

Figure 56. Dynamics of freely spreading spill causing


damage to Gulyaevskie Koshki islands

| 67
• 398 tons of oil collected by the mobile skimmer Possible further response under this scenario may
system; consist in setting the second boom line located at
OIFP in accordance with the OSR Plan. The two
• 284 tons of oi washed ashore (757 tons in absence of
boom lines could be operated in parallel to intercept
response);
the spill alternately – each line working while the other
• maximum coast pollution intensity is 69 t/km (198 t/km is relocated. Such reinforcement would require 3-4
in absence of response). additional vessels capable of towing long lines of heavy
booms. It is suggested that such mobilization can be
Oil collection dynamics and evolution of the remaining
performed after the first day, following the transfer of
spill are shown in Figure 58.
operations control to the regional or federal level.
Additional environmental effect is observed as compared
to the data for free spread of the spill: Protection of Dolgy Island, 1,500 t spill

• reduction of oil dispersion in the water column – To test the efficiency of the OSR system in cases with
by 589 tons; smaller spill volumes and duration we considered the
situation with 1,500 tons of oil spilled during three days
• reduction of hydrocarbon fumes emission into the air – (well blowout) imposing a threat to Dolgy Island in the
by 508 tons. above hydrometeorological situation and with use of the
Under this scenario also the specially protected natural response tactics developed.
reservation on the Gulyaevskie Koshki islands cannot be In case of free spreading, by the end of the spill (in 72
protected completely in spite of the rather high efficiency hours) 820 tons of oil are dispersed, 292 tons of oil are
of OSR means. The coast situation comparison with and evaporated, 388 tons remain, including 367 tons on the
without the response (see Figure 59) shows that while the sea surface and 21 tons washed ashore. The oil quantity
length of coastline damaged remains about the same, the dynamics is shown in Figure 60.
pollution intensity is somewhat reduced.

Figure 57. Spill location and configuration


120 hours after its start

68 |
Evaluation of oil spill
emergency response capabilities 2

Figure 58. Estimated spill dynamics

Figure 59. Pollution of Gulyaevskie Koshki islands


with and without oil spill response

| 69
Weathering and washing ashore continue after the end of In case of response 120 hours after the spill start about
the spill and by the end of day 5 the remaining oil quantity 129 tons of oil will remain on the surface, 35 tons will be
reduces to 160 tons, including 36 tons ashore, i.e. almost washed ashore, 956 tons will be dispersed and 278 tons
a half of washing ashore occurs after the end of the spill. will be evaporated. The prevented environmental impact
Response operations during the first day with use of will be equal to 110 tons.
booms and an autonomous mounted system give the
However the pollution of Dolgy Island cannot be
results shown in Table 9.
prevented. Figure 62 shows comparison of spill
Figure 61 provides comparison of oil balances with and impacts.
without the response during the period under study.

Figure 60. Estimated dynamics


of a 1,500 t spill
Table 9 - Spill state comparison

Масса нефти, тонн


Состояние разлива
24 hours 48 hours 72 hours
free response +/- free response +/- free response +/-
flow flow flow

Dispersed 150 135 -15 649 615 -34 820 790 -30
Evaporated 86 70 -16 200 164 -36 292 239 +34
Collected by trawling 18 29 30
Confined and collected 17 21 54
Remaining: 0 0 7 6 -1 21 20 -1
washed ashore

on the sea surface 263 261 -2 145 164 +19 367 368 +1
Total impact -33 -52 -30
(dispersed + evaporated + remaining)

70 |
Evaluation of oil spill
emergency response capabilities 2

The response reduces the total coastal pollution from 2.3.2. Ice Season
37 tons to 28 tons at about the same length (57 km and
Modeling and prediction of the behavior of spills in ice
56 km correspondingly). The response allows to reduce
conditions is characterized by a number of specific
the length of areas with high pollution intensity. This is
features. If a spill occurs in stable ice conditions
the final state as 120 hours after the spill start there is
(changes in ice conditions during the period of spill are
no pollution on the sea surface and the coastal pollution
insignificant), the SpillMod parameters of spills behavior
will not increase. Nevertheless, redistribution of coastal
allow to do all the case runs, including risk assessment of
pollution is still possible.

Figure 61. 1,500 t spill comparison


with and without the spill response

Figure 62. Comparison of Dolgy Island pollution due to


1,500 t spill with and without the response

| 71
Hours Hours
Figure 63. Wind velocity and ice concentration
in the scenario of November 18, 2000

spills. With changing ice conditions, there are significant The runs were performed for the period of 2000/2001,
problems related to the variety of initial ice configurations as the one with the most severe ice conditions in the last
and differences in spatial and time scales of the transfer decade. A characteristic feature here is the rapid closure
phenomena and changes in ice concentration and spread of a field location point by close drift ice in the second half
of spills. In these conditions, it is possible to calculate of November.
individual scenarios of spills behavior, for which OilMARS
Also, stormy weather and intense vertical convection are
model was used.
common for this period.
The runs were performed for the following scenarios:
State of the spill in ice conditions is shown as successive
• After-blowout loss of well control within three days and positions of the oil spill and oil condition profiles. The
spill of 1,500 tons of oil (rate of spill - 20.83 t/h) profiles include the amounts of oil spilled in the following
configurations:
• Destruction of the OIFP caisson followed by the loss
of content of two tanks for temporary oil storage • In the open water
(16,000 tons), the duration of the spill is five days.
• Evaporated portion
Moreover, 20% of the volume is spilled within 12 hours
(rate of spill - 266.7 t/h), the rest is spilled evenly over • Dispersion into the water column
remaining 4.5 days (rate of spill - 118.5 t/h)
• Submerged oil
• Oil spill from crude carrier (10,000 tons), the duration
• Oil on ice
of the spill is five days. 20% of the volume is spilled
within 12 hours (rate of spill - 166.7 t/h), the rest is • Oil in the snow
spilled evenly over remaining 4.5 days (rate of spill - • Oil under the ice
74.1 t/h). This scenario is almost identical to caisson
destruction scenario, and there is an additional • Oil emerging in ice clearing
condition, i.e. entering (towing) of a damaged crude • On ice.
carrier into clear water at a low speed (speed of 0.5
knots, course - 270o).

72 |
Evaluation of oil spill
emergency response capabilities 2

Spilling of 1,500 tons of oil in 72 hours For comparison purposes the maps are in the same
scale as in the previous scenarios. It is clearly seen that
The spill occurred on November 18, 2000. Temporal
with strong ice concentration the oil spill will occupy a
variability of wind velocity and estimated ice concentration
much smaller area. Ice movements have a significant
(expressed in unit fractions) at the spill point are shown in
effect on the propagation of oil (shown in inserts in
Figure 63.
Figure 68). The ice compression forces the entire mass
The state of the spill is demonstrated in Figure 64, which of oil under the ice.
shows that the spill began at 4-point ice concentration
conditions and stayed at those conditions for two Spilling of 10,000 tons (crude carrier accident)
days. During that time, with a relatively small ice The spill occurs on November 24, 2000. Temporal
concentration, intense wind-driven waves lead to the variability of wind velocity and estimated ice concentration
vertical dispersion of oil and caused frazil pollution. at the spill point are shown in Figure 69.
By the end of the third day the spill enters the area of
6-point ice, and by the end of the fourth day it moves Figure 70 shows the spatial distribution of oil pollution on
closer to the area of 8-point ice; during the fifth day water surface, ice concentration field, and the estimated
it is captured by the 10-point ice and moves with it weight balance of oil. A feature of this scenario is the
during the sixth day and is being compressed during formation of a vast area of frazil contamination from
that time. As a result, about 400 tons of oil get under exposure to wind-driven waves after the damaged vessel
the ice (marked in red on the profiles) at a distance of enters the loose ice zone (72 hours after the spill). Figure
50-55 km from the OIFP, the rest will be dispersed and 71 shows the position of the oil pollution on the water
evaporated. surface after 96 hours of the spill and 5-meter pollution
concentration on the horizon.
The oil remaining under the ice can be located only after
some time after diverging or melting of ice. Due to ice During the ice season the area around the OIFP will
drift, oil might be released further away from the spill constantly be cleared from ice, therefore it is possible to
source. formally assume that oil spills at the OIFP will occur at a
relatively small ice concentration. Currently, it is difficult
Spilling of 16,000 tons to determine the condition and size of the ice-free area,
(breakdown of the OIFP oil storage) but most likely, it can be maintained in the leeward
sector no further than the platform security zone, and its
The spill occurred on November 20, 2000. Temporal
configuration will be quickly (probably within a few hours)
variability of wind velocity and estimated ice concentration
changing in the wind and currents.
at the spill point are shown in Figure 65.
Close drift ice is characterized by strong spatial and
Figure 63 shows the spatial distribution of oil pollution on
temporal variability. Within hours, favorable ice conditions
water surface, ice concentration field, and the estimated
can turn into a solid (10-point) ice field with ridges.
weight balance of oil. The weight of spill is heavy, so even
OilMARS model does not have sufficient spatial resolution
if the area of the spill is limited by ice concentration, the
to simulate the events on a scale comparable to the size
width of the spill is large enough (up to 5 km). After 72
of ice clearings made by an icebreaker, so they can be
hours, the spill enters the ice concentration zone and,
analyzed only qualitatively.
as a result of compression of the ice cover, a significant
portion of oil gets under the ice. Due to temporary In this crude carrier accident scenario the oil is initially
diverging and loosened concentration of the ice, the oil spilled at the rate of about 1,000 tons in 6 hours (167
might be released to the surface in ice clearing areas and tons/hour, or about 180 m3/hour); within the free sector,
a zone of secondary pollution of surface water might be a layer of oil 2.0-2.5 cm thick is formed, and is held at a
formed (marked in yellow). relatively small ice concentration. No booms are required
to collect the oil, the skimmers of sufficient performance
The following scenario is similar to the previous one, but
can collect the spill at a rate corresponding to the rate
the spill occurs on April 2, 2001.
of oil spill. Given the two-hour delay to assess the
The temporal variability of wind speed and estimated ice situation, to select location, and install the skimmer, in
concentration at the spill point are shown in Figure 67. order to collect the spilled oil within the next 4 hours, the
Figure 68 shows the spatial distribution of oil pollution on collection rate of about 250 m3/hour should be achieved.
water surface, ice concentration field, and the estimated This can be formally achieved if a Free Floating Offshore
weight balance of oil. skimmer is available on an all-year-round basis on the

| 73
48 hours

24 hours 48 hours

72 hours 96 hours

144 hours
120 hours

Figure 64. The profile of transfer and state of 1,500


tons of spilled oil, as of November 18, 2000

74 |
Evaluation of oil spill
emergency response capabilities 2

Ice Concentration
Wind Velocity, m/s

Hours Hours

Figure 65. The conditions


of the scenario of November 20, 2000

supply vessel (the current OSR Plan assumes that in the Among additional difficulties there might be the absence
winter season this skimmer is based in Murmansk; the of backup OSR equipment in case of failure of the
duty vessel has a skimmer of Arctic Skimmer type with main units, as well as delay in the delivery of external
rated capacity of 70 m3/hour on board, see section 2.3.1 assistance in winter season.
above), if it is to some extent capable of collecting oil in
ice clearing zones.
However, it is clear that this type of assessment is a
formal one and the operational emergency situation
can be developed so that even under favorable
environmental conditions (small ice drift, stable position
of the ice edge, etc.) the rescue vessel might not be
able to perform these operations for various reasons
(the need for rescue operations, fire-fighting operations,
assistance to damaged crude carrier, etc.). Heavy
complicating circumstances might include dark time
of the year, intensive evaporation and spread of spilled
oil and forming of gas clouds with risk of fire, presence
of the damaged vessel, potential precipitation, etc.

| 75
24 hours 48 hours

72 hours 96 hours

120 hours 144 hours

Figure 66. The profile of transfer and state


of 16,000 tons of spilled oil, as of November 20, 2000

76 |
Evaluation of oil spill
emergency response capabilities 2
Wind Velocity, m/s

Ice Concentration

Hours Hours

Figure 67. The conditions


of the scenario of April 2, 2001
Wind Velocity, m/s

Ice Concentration

Hours Hours
Figure 69. The conditions of the
scenario of November 24, 2000

| 77
24 hours 48 hours

72 hours 96 hours

120 hours 144 hours

Figure 68. The profile of transfer and state of


16,000 tons of spilled oil, as of April 2, 2000

78 |
Evaluation of oil spill
emergency response capabilities 2

24 hours 48 hours

72 hours 96 hours

120 hours 144 hours

Figure 70. The profile of transfer and state


of 10,000 tons of spilled oil, as of November 24, 2000

| 79
Figure 71. 5-meter concentration
of pollution on the horizon (mg/m3)

80 |
Conclusion

The analysis of available data, studies of 6. To improve the oil collection efficiency we recommend:
hydrometeorological and other natural conditions at the
• to maximize the speed of mobilization of the
time of response in the Pechora Sea and investigation
reserve boom line and corresponding vessels;
into spill behavior and potential OSR operations revealed
limitations to performance and efficiency of OSR • to use vessel-mounted oil collection systems for
operations using the resources specified in the OSR Plan spill trawling and oil lifting aboard an oil collecting
for OIFP Prirazlomnaya. We revealed and examined the vessel for works under the conditions of rapid
scenarios that do not allow for protection and efficient changes in tidal currents.
reduction of pollution caused to the most important
7. Prompt response can reduce the environmental
and vulnerable specially protected natural reservations.
impact, but protection and significant reduction of
By results of the studies into the spill behavior in high
pollution to specially protected reservations cannot be
seas under various hydrometeorological conditions and
achieved in the event of the spills under study.
response scenarios we can conclude that:
8. Protection of specially protected reservations
4. Spill confinement with use of booms installed at
by deployment of coastal booms in the area of
distances corresponding to 4-hour spill propagation
spill approach to the shore is inefficient. We can
(normative requirement) can be not efficient. An earlier
recommend the tactics of selective protection
interception of the spill plume increases the efficiency
of predetermined coastal areas on the basis of
of booms, but variable directions of the currents do not
assessment of their relative environmental sensitivity.
allow for continuous oil collection within the booms and
impose the need for periodic relocation of the booms. Concerning the spills in the ice period:
5. The most efficient way to deal with massive and 1. We identified actual ice conditions and accompanying
long lasting spills under complicated meteorological hydrometeorological situations that lead to rapid spill
conditions consists in setting of intercepting booms cover with ice of high concentration, spill capture in
as close to the source as possible to accumulate the ice, penetration of large quantities of oil under the ice
maximum amount of oil (100-120 tons before the and oil displacement on top of the ice.
spill drifts under the influence of tidal currents) for its 2. We have to acknowledge that in this analysis we found
rapid collection before the boom is deformed with no realistic way to efficiently respond to massive oil
subsequent maneuvers of the vessels and the boom spill in ice conditions in terms allowing to avoid oil
line for resetting of the oil barrier. capturing by the surrounding ice.
One cycle of such operations may take about 6 hours: 3. The performance of all known technologies for spill
2 hours for boom setting and oil accumulation, 2 response in ice conditions is such that even when
hours for oil collection with a skimmer and 2 hours for detecting a massive oil accumulation it can not be
movement to the new setting location. Potentially, two rapidly collected42. Spill response in ice conditions
such operations can be conducted during the hours requires long and labor-intensive work for spill
of daylight. Besides, additional time is required for monitoring, search for the biggest areas of oil pollution
reloading of the collected oil after 2-3 cycles. in various forms, including oil on the ice surface, under
It is assumed that at least 4 vessels must participate the snow cover and under the ice.
in such operations: 2 for boom setting, retention 4. Response to ice-captured spills requires engagement
and maneuvering, 1 for oil collection, 1 for shuttle of aviation, ice-class vessels and special equipment
transportation of the collected oil from the oil collecting for oil collection in ice conditions, and mobilization
vessel to the OIFP. of considerable manpower having sufficiently high
qualification.

| 81
5. The variety of possible circumstances and uncertainty 4. During polar nights remote detection and monitoring
of accident conditions and spill behavior in the ice of oil spills is of paramount importance. E.g. NOFO
period make early calendar and resource planning of (Norsk Oljevernforening For Operatorselskap -
such operations virtually impossible. However, this Norwegian Clean Seas Association for Operating
does not mean that there is no need for creation and Companies)45 standard provides for equipping of
maintenance of reserves of necessary material and duty rescue and salvage vessels with spill detection
technical resources, which is likely to be a regional and and monitoring systems using onboard X-band radar
federal level objective, whose consideration is beyond (frequency 8-12 GHz, wavelength 2.5-3.75 cm).
the scope of this paper. Modern systems are attached to standard ship-borne
radars, they can be operated under any weather
This paper is not aimed at discussion of OSR
conditions and at night to detect spills of over 100
technologies and/or providing recommendations
liters at wind force up to 6 on the Beaufort scale within
regarding this aspect. Basing on the principle of
the distances up to several marine miles. Examples
applying the best available technologies (BAT) we can
of commercial systems for spill detection and control
only recommend to consider a wider circle of special
are System OSD300046, System MIROS OSD47 and a
and proven technical means. The minimum points for
number of others.
discussion are as follows:
5. The need for coordination and mobilization of forces
1. Taking into account the limited applicability of
and resources in the vast sea area with rapid changes
long booms, this study additionally considers the
in hydrometeorological conditions and highly sensitive
technology of spill trawling with use of vessel-mounted
coasts determines the importance of real-time
systems with short directing boom lines and an on-
forecasts of the situation and, in particular, possible
board skimmer lifting the oil onboard the oil collecting
directions of oil spill propagation. This can be ensured
vessel. One example of such system is Lamor Side
by software and information systems using specialized
Collector LSC-125 3C/5C43 with manufacturer-
forecasts of Roshydromet and SpillMod and OilMARS
specified operating capacity at speeds of up to 4
spills distribution models adapted to the tasks of
knots (the speed of 2 m/s was assumed for the
operational forecasting and field applications.
modeling).
The last and very important conclusion that can be
2. Given the limited quantity of technical means we
drawn from this study is a proposal to provide regular
recommend to maximize their concentration at the
intensive training for persons who may be assigned to
OIFP or onboard the rescue and salvage vessels, up
manage the operations and for OSR personnel on the
to an reload of such means from a leaving ship to the
basis of simulated situations. The resulting knowledge
duty vessel. It is also important from the point of view
base, methodology and modeling tools can significantly
of redundancy to provide for failures of equipment,
enhance understanding of the diversity of possible
whose operating life and reliability are uncertain.
situations, effects and interaction of influencing factors
The procedure stipulated by the OSR Plan with partial and, ultimately, increase the readiness to act in real
location of the equipment at the base in Murmansk conditions.
makes their prompt mobilization practically impossible.
3. Taking into account that capabilities of a powerful oil
collecting system can be limited in ice period due to
insufficient inflow in the conditions of low temperatures
and concentrated ice, it is advisable to consider
application of less powerful but more mobile and
relatively cheap systems mounted onboard a vessel
(examples of such systems include Lamor Recovery
Bucket, and Oil Mop/Sea Mop rope skimmers). These
systems can be easily moved and repositioned to oil
accumulation locations. Analogues of such systems
have demonstrated good results in field conditions44.

82 |
Endnotes

1. http://www.shelf-neft.gazprom.ru/?type=ecology hybrid method. Collected report “Natural disasters and elemental


calamities in the Far East Region”. Vladivostok, FEB of the USSR
2. Semanov G.N. Offshore oil spills and preparedness to oil spill AS, 1990, v.2, p277-293
response. Transportation Safety, No. 2, 2005
21. Arkhipov B.V., Popov S.K. Modeling of density and drift currents in
3. Crude oils and gas condensates of Russia. Reference Book. Volume the south-east of Barents Sea. – Oceanography, 1996, v.36, No.6
1. Crude oils of the European part and gas condensates of Russia.
Edited by Demidenko R.F., M.: Tekhnika Publish House, 2000 22. http://method.hydromet.ru/model/region/region.html
4. Fingas, M.F., Fieldhouse B. A Review of Knowledge on Water-in-oil 23. Zilberstein O.I., Safronov G.F., Popov S.K. Barents Sea tidal motion
Emulsions. Proc. of the 25th AMOP Technical Seminar, Environment study based on hydrodynamic simulation. Trans. GOINS.-Pb.,
Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, 2006 Hydrometeoizdat, issue 207, 2007
5. Key requirements to oil and oil product spill prevention and response 24. Description of CFSR in given in Saha, Suranjana, and Coauthors,
plan development (approved by the RF Government Decree No.613 The NCEP Climate Forecast System Reanalysis. Bull. Amer. Meteor.
dated 21.08.2000) Soc., 91, 1015.1057, 2010
6. Rules for oil and oil product spill prevention and response activities 25. Variability of environmental conditions in the continental shelf of
on the territory of the Russian Federation (approved by the RF Barents and Kara Seas (edited by A.I. Danilov, E.U. Mironov, V.A.
Government Decree No. 240 dated 15.04.2002 Spichkin)// SPb, AARI, 2004
7. Development and coordination rules for plans of oil and oil product 26. Complex ice studies to design oil loading terminal and pipeline in the
spill prevention and response on the territory of the Russian continental shelf of Pechora Sea near Varandey // Scientific technical
Federation (approved by the Order of the RF Ministry for Emergency report, AARI, 2004
Situations No. 621 dated 28.12.2004
27. Ivanov V.V., Lebedev A.A. Main mechanisms of multiyear and
8. Oil and Gas Eurasia, No. 11, November 2010 seasonal variability of atmospheric macro-circulation, meteorological
and ice conditions in the southeastern part of the Barents Sea in late
9. Source: http://admship.ru XX – early XXI. AARI, v.499, 2004
10. Efficient, Safe and Sustainable Traffic at Sea. EU Project, 2011, 28. Ovsienko, S., Zatsepa, S., Ivchenko, A., Study and Modeling of
http://efficiensea.org/files/mainoutputs/wp6/d_wp6_2_01_02.pdf Behavior and Spreading of Oil in Cold Water and in Ice Conditions.
11. Simulations of Oil Drift and Spreading and Oil Spill Response 15th International Conference on Port and Ocean Engineering under
Analysis. ARCOP Project GRD2-2000-30112. Hamburg Ship Model Arctic Conditions, Espoo, Finland. 1999
Basin (HSVA)- SINTEF, 2005 29. Ovsienko S.N., Zatsepa S.N., Ivchenko A.A. Oil Spill Modeling and
12. Dragsund E. Oil spill risk in the Barents Sea – oil industry vs maritime Environmental Risk Assessment. Trans. GOINS, issue 209. M.:
sector. DNV, 2005 Hydrometeoizdat, 2005

13. Aleutian Islands Risk Assessment. Phase A-Preliminary Risk 30. Ovsienko S.N., Zatsepa S.N., Ivchenko A.A. Numerical Simulation
Assessment. Task 2A: Marine Spill Frequency and Size Report. DNV as Data Support Feature for Decision Making when Selecting
& ERM - WEST Inc., 2010 Strategy for Marine Environment Protection from Oil Pollution. Trans.
GOINS, issue 213. M.: Hydrometeoizdat, 20011
14. Risk Assessment and of Hypothetical Spill Examples at the Kitimat
Terminal and in Wright Sound. Stantec Consulting, Canada, 2010 31. Stanovoy V.V., Lavrenov I.V., Neelov I.A. Oil Spill Simulation System
for the Arctic Seas. Problems of the Arctic and Antarctic, No. 77,
15. Risk Assessment Data Directory. Blowout Frequencies. OGP, 2010 2007
16. Jodestol K.A et all. Achieving an Industry Standard in the 32. Kulakov M.Y., Makshtas A.P., Shutilin S.V. AARI–IOCM –Arctic
Assessment of Environmental Risk: Oil Spill Risk Management and Ocean water and ice circulation model. // Problems of the Arctic and
the MIRA Method. 2001 Int. Oil Spill Conference Antarctic, No. 2 (92), 2012
17. Ship/Platform collision incident database (2001). HSE UK, 2003 33. HELCOM Recommendation 31/1. Development of National Ability to
18. The NCEP/NCAR 40-Year Reanalysis Project. American Respond to Spillages of Oil and Other Harmful Substances. 2010
Meteorological Society, 1996 34. Elise DeCola. Review of Oil Spill Responses on Moderately-Sized
19. Data available at http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/data/reanalysis/ Spills in US Waters from 1993-2000. NUKA Research&Planning
Group, 2002
20. Zilberstein O.I., Safronov G.F., Semenov A.Y. Hydrodynamic
simulation of tide and surge waves in Barents Sea under difference 35. ASTM Standard F 2084 - 01 (2007) Standard Guide for Collecting
Containment Boom Performance Data in Controlled Environments

| 83
36. See, for example, Fingas M. Weather Windows for Oil Spill
Countermeasures. Environmental Technology Centre Environment
Canada, 2004
37. STO 31 8.04.32-2008 Minimum equipment standards for
professional rescue and salvage units engaged for oil spill response
in open water (adopted and entered into force by decree of the
Technical Committee 318 of the Federal Marine and River Transport
Agency No. 2 of June 16, 2008)
38. Oil Spill Response Gap and Response Capacity Analysis for
Proposed Northern Gateway Tanker Oil Spills in Open Water and
Protected Water Operating Environments. Nuka Research and
Planning Group, LLC, 2012
39. Tolman, H.L. User manual and system documentation of
WAVEWATCH III version 3.14. NOAA / NWS / NCEP / MMAB
Technical Note 276, http://polar.ncep.noaa.gov/waves/wavewatch/
h/, 2009
40. ASTM Standard F 1780 - 97 (2002) Standard Guide for Estimating
Oil Spill Recovery System Effectiveness
41. See, for example, Recommendations of the Joint Industry Oil Spill
Preparedness & Response Task Force. Ecosystem Management
& Associates, Inc. under contract with the American Petroleum
Institute. September 3, 2010.
42. Mansurov M., Surkov Г., Zhuravel V., Marichev A. Oil spill response
in ice conditions. Gazprom Information and Advertising Center,
Moscow, 2004
43. http://www.lamor.com/pdf-books/productreel-1-2012-russian/LR
Lamor Product Reel ven.pdf
44. Joint industry program on oil spill contingency for Arctic and ice
covered waters (JIP Oil-in-Ice). Summary Report. SINTEF, 2010
45. Requirements for Oil Recovery Vessels on the Norwegian
Continental Shelf. NOFO Standard 2010
46. Automatic Oil Spill Detection System - OSD3000 http://www.vissim.
no/product osd3000.asp
47. MIROS OSD - Oil Spill Detection System http://www.eurekanordic.
com/documents/MirosOSDSystem.pdf

84 |
The report was commissioned by:

Greenpeace is an independent global WWF mission is to stop the degradation of the planet’s
campaigning organisation that acts to change natural environment and to build a future in which
attitudes and behaviour, to protect and conserve humans live in harmony with nature.
the environment and to promote peace.

Moscow Moscow

26 b.1, Leningradsky prospekt, 109240 Moscow,


Moscow,125040, Russia Nikoloyamskaya st.19 building 3
Phones/Fax: +7 (495) 988-74-60 Phone: +7 (495) 727 09 39
Fax: +7 (495) 727 09 38
Saint Petersburg
Room 117, Mendeleevskaya street, 9 , http://www.wwf.ru/
Saint-Petersburg, 194044, Russia
russia@wwf.ru
Phones/Fax: +7 (812) 347-7134, 347-7135

info@greenpeace.ru
www.greenpeace.ru

You might also like