Coastal Response Research Center

October 26, 2007

Nancy Kinner, UNH Amy Merten, NOAA

Presentation for USEPA

1 Today’s Presentation

• Center Mission • Selected Externally Funded Research Projects • 2007 RFP Process • Environmental Response Management Tool (ERMA) • Oil-in-Ice Initiatives • Website

2 Center Mission

3 Overall Center Mission

• Develop new approaches to spill response and restoration through research/synthesis of information • Serve as a resource for ORR and NOAA • Serve as a hub for spill research, development, and technical transfer • Oil spill community (e.g., RRTs, internationally)

4 Specific Center Missions

• Conduct and oversee basic and applied research and outreach on spill response and restoration

• External and internal research • Transform research results into practice • NOAA liaisons • Encourage strategic partnerships to achieve mission

• Conduct outreach to improve preparedness and response

• Workshops, summits • Create a learning center for new approaches to

spill response and restoration • Graduate and undergraduate funding

5 Federal Spill R&D

Fate & Transport; Operations Effects; Restoration NOAA (CRRC) USCG EPA MMS EPA Spill R&D

Solutions Tools

Needs Oil Spill Needs Community

6 Externally Funded Research

7 Complete List of All Projects in Center Packet

8 Projects Completed in 2007

• McGrath and DiToro - PAH toxicity • Centerpiece of toxicity manual

• Tjeerdema - dispersed oil toxicity to salmon smolts • CAOSPR supporting next phase of research

• Tseng*- spill impacts on tern populations • Tuler – performance metrics for spill response • Being used to evaluate ERA workshop value

• Payne* - Use of HF radar, drogues, and in situ fluorometry to track plumes and to calculate vertical dispersivity • Will be used by USCG R&D for SMART protocol update

* Indicates undergoing peer review by Center Science Advisory Panel

9 2006 Annual RFP Funded Projects

• Katz – New holographic method for tracking dispersed oil droplet size – Johns Hopkins - 2 years - $240,000

• NOAA Liaison – Bill Lehr (ERD) • Reed – Natural long term dispersion and weathering of oil at cold temperatures – SINTEF – 2 years - $278,700

• NOAA Liaison – Chris Barker • Katz and Reed collaboration • Using same oil provided by MMS • Sharing techniques

10 2006 Annual RFP Funded Projects

• Garfield – Use of HF radar to predict surface currents for GNOME spill trajectories – UCSF – 2 years - $230,000 • NOAA Liaison – Glen Watabayashi • Peterson – Evaluation of restoration scaling techniques – UNC – 2 years- $56,600 • NOAA Liaison – John Rapp

11 2007 RFP

12 2007 RFP

• 4 topic areas • Submerged Oil • Human Dimensions • Habitat Recovery Metrics • Ecologically Driven Response

13 2007 RFP Timeline

• Develop topic areas: Jan – Mar 2007 • May 15, 2007 RFP released • June 15, 2007 Letters of Intent due (32 received) • Oct 5, 2007 Full proposals due (22 received) • Nov 29, 2007 Peer reviews due (3 per proposal, 1 NOAA reviewer) • Dec 12, 2007 PI rebuttal due • Jan 8-10, 2008 Full Panel meets to recommend funding • February 2008 Æ Inform awardees

14 Outreach/Partnerships

15 Environmental Response Management Application (ERMA)

16 Portsmouth Harbor Response Initiative (PHRI)

• Example of Center interaction with other UNH/NOAA centers (e.g., Joint Hydrographic Center, CICEET, Environmental Data Collaborative) • Broad integration across oil spill community (e.g., USCG, NOAA, state agencies, potential responsible parties) • Integrated “modeling” approach to displaying incident information and providing validated data with GIS-based technology • NOAA ORR detail at UNH for Michele Jacobi of Assessment and Restoration Division 17 A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words…

• Diverse datasets can be interlaced on a single map to better visualize a the complex nature of an area

18 Why Use a Web Based GIS Platform during a Response?

• Integrate and synthesize various types of info • Provide a common operational picture for situational awareness • Improve communication and coordination among responders and stakeholders • Visualization of a complex situation • Provide resource managers with the information they need to make better informed decisions

19 Functional Web GIS Platform for Response

• Package data in a well-designed management, visualization, and analysis tool: • Easily accessible - field and command • User friendly • Quick to display • Capable of real-time data display • Simple to update/ download from • Secure

20 Project Partners: Technical Advisers

• US Coast Guard • NOAA • US EPA • Emergency Response Div. • NH DES • Coastal Services Center • ME DEP • Office Coast Survey

• NH Fish and Game • Weather Service

• Gulf of ME Ocean • NH Coastal Manager Observing System • NH Div. Emergency Services • UNH • JHC • Piscataqua River • CCOM Cooperative • COOA

• Research Computing

21 Leveraging Existing Data Resources

• Environmental - contaminant datasets, water quality monitoring sites, protected areas, restoration sites, etc. • Habitat classifications and species distributions data • Navigational - electronic navigation charts & scanned paper charts • Meteorological observations • Models - trajectories/forecasts

22 Spill Incident Info Volume & Chemistry of Spill Hydrodynamic and Shoreline Data Resources at Risk

23 What Has Been Compiled?

• Library of background data • Base maps- shoreline data, roads, etc. • Imagery • Navigational charts • Bathymetry surveys • Environmental Sensitivity Indices • Environmental monitoring sites • Weather observation buoys • Restoration sites

24 What Can be Displayed?

• Real-time observations and monitoring data • Observation buoys - What is being collected? • Re-direct to the data source • Data links to documents and websites • Restoration Project • Summary PDFs • Websites • Field data & georeferenced photos • International Coastal Clean-up Surveys • Specific data marine debris items • Photos collected during survey

25 How Does This Help in Spill Response?

• Hypothetical Spill • Uploaded trajectory - movie display • Where did it hit relative to ESI layer? -See exact classification or download and print map -View data sources • Show results of Shoreline Cleanup and Assessment Team (SCAT) work • Visualize spill relative to ship traffic • Gather current weather observations from buoys • Display existing environmental contaminant data

26 Access the Prototype Online at:

http://www.crrc.unh.edu/workshops/phri/index.htm

27 Practical Implementation of ERMA

• Assist with spill preparedness • Display jurisdictional boundaries, specially regulated areas, areas of socio-economic

importance • Access points for cleanup • Staging areas and command centers • Regional documentation, points of contact, etc.

28 Practical Implementation of ERMA

• Assist in coordinating response efforts • Visualize magnitude and extent • Triage sites for action • Track progress of clean-up • Access real-time data • Upload data from the field and access forms • Increase communication

29 Practical Implementation of ERMA

• Define the extent of potential impacts • General habitat and land use information • Areas of biological significance - haul outs, rookeries, nesting grounds, essential or critical

habitat • Species-specific data - biological resources in the region - threatened or endangered?

• Where is there current monitoring data

30 Practical Implementation of ERMA

• Assist in Recovery and Restoration • Access existing environmental monitoring sites • Assist with sampling design • Inventory restoration projects • Locate long-term monitoring sites • Coordinate with regional projects

31 ERMA goes South

• Louisiana Initiative • Partners: • LAOSRDP (Don Davis) • ORR Gulf Region (Charlie Henry and Troy Baker) • LSU Sea Grant (Rex McCafferty) • Pilot Site: Barataria Bay, SE Louisiana • Possibility extending Michele Jacobi’s detail • Kick-off Meeting, Jan 2008

32 Web-based Query Manager

• Extension of ERMA Initiative • Added benefit of M. Jacobi UNH detail • ARD desire to develop web-based “Query Manager” in Watershed Projects • Chemical database and query system (Outdated software) • Ongoing process with ARD and UNH Research Computing Center

33 Oil and Ice Initiatives

34 Oil-in-Ice: Behavior, Biodegradation and Potential Exposure (JIP P9)

Amy A. Merten, NOAA’s Office of Response and Restoration, Coastal Response Research Center (CRRC), Nancy Kinner, University of New Hampshire, CRRC, Per Johan Brandvik, SINTEF, Liv-Guri Faksness (SINTEF), Odd Gunnar Brakstad (SINTEF), Mark Reed (SINTEF), W. Scott Pegau (OSRI), John Whitney (NOAA ORR), Whitney Blanchard (UNH), Rainer Lohmann (URI) 35 Species sensitivities to Oil

30 Neanthes arenaceodentata

Pimephales promelas 25 Artemia salina Cancer magister Cyprinodon variegatus Eualus spp. Lepomis macrochirus

20 Ictalurus punctatus Daphnia magna Palaemonetes pugio

Morone saxatilis

15 10 spp. benthic amphipods Elasmopus pectinicrus

Aedes spp. Chironomus sp.

Callinectes sapidus Oncorhynchus mykiss 10 Species or Group Rank Crango franciscorum Micropterus salmoides Eurytemora affinis Neomysis americana, Mysidopsis bahia 5 Oncorhynchus spp., Salmo sp., Salvelinus sp., Thymallus sp. Salmo trutta Penaeus aztecus Oncorhynchus gorbuscha Pandalus goniurus 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 LC50 (ppb total PAHs)

French-McCay 2002. 36 Measuring Biological Effects • Estimating “impacts”? • Basic Risk Equation

Chemical Exposure Toxicological Response

-Route of Uptake -Mode/Mechanism of toxicity Æ -Concentration - Lethality -Duration -Changes in growth -Bioavailability, and reproduction absorption, metabolism -Changes in behavior -Population level parameters

37 Measuring Biological Effects • Estimating “impacts”? • Basic Risk Equation

Chemical Exposure Toxicological Response

-Route of Uptake Known -Mode/Mechanism of toxicity Æ -Concentration - Lethality -Duration -Changes in growth -Bioavailability, and reproduction absorption, metabolism -Changes in behavior -Population level parameters

38 Measuring Biological Effects • Estimating “impacts”? • Basic Risk Equation

Chemical Exposure Toxicological Response

-Route of Uptake Known -Mode/Mechanism of toxicity Æ -Concentration Unknown - Lethality -Duration -Changes in growth -Bioavailability, and reproduction absorption, metabolism -Changes in behavior -Population level parameters

39 Measuring Biological Effects • Estimating “impacts”? • Basic Risk Equation

Chemical Exposure Toxicological Response

-Route of Uptake Known -Mode/Mechanism of toxicity Æ -Concentration Unknown - Lethality -Duration Unknown -Changes in growth -Bioavailability, and reproduction absorption, metabolism -Changes in behavior -Population level parameters

40 Measuring Biological Effects • Estimating “impacts”? • Basic Risk Equation

Chemical Exposure Toxicological Response

-Route of Uptake Known -Mode/Mechanism of toxicity Æ -Concentration Unknown - Lethality -Duration Unknown -Changes in growth -Bioavailability, and reproduction absorption, Unknown metabolism -Changes in behavior -Population level parameters

41 Conceptual Model Food Web Cycle

Pelagic Feeders (fish, marine mammals)

42 Transport/Exposure Mechanisms

Diffusion Ice

Bulk oil encapsulated in ice from below Bulk Oil →measure dissolved constituents (WAF - e.g., PAHs) Ice with Brine Channels

C Biodegradation 1m particulates Coil droplets Density of brine transport downward Diffusion →will transport dissolved (bioavailable) components of oil downward Sea Water

43 Conceptual Model Food Web Cycle

Pelagic Feeders (fish, marine mammals)

44 Seasonal Progression of Oil Frozen into Ice Field in Winter, and Released During Melting and Breakup in Spring

45 Oil May Enter the Ice from a Sub Sea Release or a Surface Release

46 Oil-in-Ice: Behavior, Biodegradation and Potential Exposure

• Focus: • Identified gaps in understanding transport of oil components in sea ice

• Need improved understanding in order to define risks of exposure to biological communities associated with sea ice

• Focus of study: transport through ice during freezing- thawing cycle

• Historically, oil in ice research focused on bulk oil; limited studies on dissolved components (bioavailable & toxic form) except for Brandvik & Faksness, 2005 & Payne et. al., 1991)

47 Oil-in-Ice: Behavior, Biodegradation and Potential Exposure

• Questions We Want to Answer? • What is the behavior of oil in ice? • What are the transport & degradation (physical, chemical, and biological) processes and rates that govern the fate of oil frozen in ice? • How does the change of the structure of the ice affect transport? • What are the exposures (e.g., composition, concentrations, durations) to which ice-related organisms may be exposed? • What are the potential effects of these exposures? • How will response options affect transport/biodegradation processes and exposure pathways?

48 Oil-in-Ice: Behavior, Biodegradation and Potential Exposure

• Focused on “Oil-in-Ice” 1) Transport/exposure → Brine rejection, cycling → Diffusion 2) Biodegradation 3) Modeling • Assumption: Once oil (dissolved, particulates, bulk droplets) leaves ice structure → go to other models & databases (hydrodynamic, toxicity models, etc.)

49 POSSIBLE EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH FREEZING ICE CORES

SPME fibers

Insulated box in freezer

Heating element 50

Transport/Exposure Lab Experiments (cont.)

• Focus on 1 oil – Prudoe Bay or Goliath • Quantify changes in concentrations across time through freezing

& thawing cycles

• 3 Temps (-5ºC, -10ºC, -20ºC), 3 reps each treatment • Size of columns still in question

• Volume for organic chemistry is constraining

• Comparing semi-permeable micro extraction (SPME)

techniques with traditional techniques

• Sample vertically • Use of SPME fibers or other micro-sorption tools expand field

verification (meso-scale and large scale) potential

51 Biodegradation Experiments

• Assumption: 1) Microbes need water to be active

2) Most microbial activity in ice will occur in brine pockets/channels • Focus: Heterotrophic bacteria because of their potential to degrade WAF • Objective: 1) Does bioremediation of WAF occur in brine pockets/channels? 2) What are the biodegradation rates of WAF as a function of brine strength, temperature, light levels, particulate content in ice, and WAF concentration? 3) What are the rates of WAF biodegradation relative to WAF transport out of ice?

52 Biological Effects of Oil-in-Ice JIP Project

• Biodegradation Experiments • Batch factorial design studies in brine using indigenous microbes • 3 Temps (-5ºC, -10ºC, -20ºC)

• 2 Brine strengths

• 2 Particulate concentrations

• 2 Light levels

• Time series sampling of replicate flasks

• Analysis:

• Light levels

• Chemistry: salinity, WAF 25 components, terminal electron acceptors (TEA), TOC, SS, nutrients • Microbial Communities: • Epifluorescent counting: bacteria, protists, algae; hydrocarbon degraders, sulfate reducing bacteria • Molecular methods: DGGE, RT-PCR • Rates: various naphthalene based ratios, change in concentrations vs. time 53 A Model of Oil Encapsulation & Release in First Year Ice Model Attributes and Processes: • 1- or 2-Dimensional (Vertical-Horizontal) • 1-D is simpler • 2-D will allow uneven distribution of oil under and in ice • Focus on Microscale (mm) to Mesoscale (~1 m) Processes • Time-Dependent: Will Simulate Annual Freezing-Thawing Cycle

• Ice State Variables: • Porosity/permeability (not the same; the latter is a function of the connectivity of the porosity) • Thickness • Temperature gradient (vertical) • Salinity • Capability for Eventual Inclusion as Module in 3-D Oil Spill Models

54 Model Attributes and Processes (continued):

• Radiative Heat Transfer (Insolation) • Changes due to presence of oil • May require experimental data • Vertical Transport in Brine Channels • Snow load induces transport upwards • Ice accretion induces transport downwards • Oil Representation as Multiple Components • More accurate calculation of evaporation, biodegradation, dissolution, toxicity • Produces Time Series of Exposures at the Ice-Water Interface • Oil May Enter Ice as Surface or Subsurface Release • Boundary Conditions: • Oil entering and leaving ice • Water and air temperatures, insolation, snowfall

55 Next Steps/Timeline

• Finalizing comprehensive proposal – end of Oct 07 • Peer Review – Nov – Dec 07 • Reference Group (end of Oct 07): • 3 JIP members, 3 outside scientists • Funds allocated to respective PIs – Jan/Feb 08

56 Conclusions

• Active Involvement in International R&D and operational efforts for preparing for spills in Arctic waters • Opportunities for increased collaborations at the field-scale assessment level • Building a foundation for Risk Assessment of Spills in Arctic environments • New Model for Coastal Response Research Center • $400 K to support International Collaboration

• Need for comprehensive, environmental sensitivity mapping and monitoring strategy for prioritizing efforts in the Arctic • Need to focus on societal consequences of increased spill risks in the Arctic

57 Arctic Disasters Workshop

• Center-initiated effort • Identify most probable scenarios for marine disasters in Arctic Seas and impacts on: • Health and Human Safety • Environment • Arctic Communities • Frame solutions • Co-sponsors: NOAA, USCG, US Arctic Commission • Dates: March 18 – 20, 2008 (UNH) • Arctic Seas: Envisioning Disasters Æ Framing Solutions

58 Coastal Response Research Center www.crrc.unh.edu

59