Water Column Monitoring 2017 Environmental Monitoring Of
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Water Column Monitoring 2017 Environmental monitoring of petroleum activities on the Norwegian continental shelf 2017 Report Reference: Pampanin DM, Brooks S, Grøsvik BE, Sanni S 2019. Water Column Monitoring 2017. Environmental monitoring of petroleum activities on the Norwegian continental shelf 2017. NORCE-Environment REPORT 007 – 2019, pp 92. 1 Project title: Water Column Monitoring 2017 Project number: 100399 Institutions: NORCE, NIVA, IMR, SINTEF Client/s: Norsk Olje og Gass Classification: Confidential Report no.: NORCE Environment 007-2019 Number of pages: 92 Stavanger, 28.01.2020 Daniela M. Pampanin Shaw Bamber Hans Kleivdal Project manager Quality assurance Executive Vice President - Environment 2 Preface Companies operating on the Norwegian continental shelf are required to carry out environmental monitoring in order to obtain information on the actual and potential environmental impacts of their activities and to give environmental authorities a better basis for regulating releases of pollutants. The general purpose is to provide an overview of the environmental status and of trends over time seen in relation to offshore oil and gas activities. Monitoring is intended to indicate whether the environmental status on the Norwegian continental shelf is stable, deteriorating or improving, due to operators’ activities. In addition to identifying trends, the results should as far as possible provide a basis for projections for future developments. Operators and authorities use monitoring results as a source of information and as grounds for decision making regarding new measures to be implemented offshore. The results are also used to develop and report on national environmental indicators for the offshore oil and gas industry. The WCM programme has been performed through collaboration between NORCE (which now include the previous International Research Institute of Stavanger, IRIS), the Norwegian Institute for Water Research (NIVA), the Institute of Marine Research (IMR) and SINTEF. The work participants from these institutions include: NORCE: Daniela M. Pampanin, Mark Berry, Steinar Sanni, Emily Lyng, Stig Westerlund, Kjell Birger Øysæd, Eivind Larssen, Sophia Mehdipour, Frederike Keitel-Groner, Ingrid Caroline Vaaland. NIVA: Steven Brooks, Christopher Harman, Bjørnar Andre Beylich, Jarle Håvardstun, Sigurd Øxnevad, Tania Cristina Gomes, Lene Fredriksen, You Song, Maria Therese Hultman. IMR: Bjørn Einar Grøsvik, Sonnich Meier, Guri Nesje, Grethe Tveit, Anna Ersland, Therese Aase, Stig Mæhle, Kai Ove Skaftnesmo. SINTEF: Bjørn Henrik Hansen, Dag Altin, Lisbet Sørensen, Tone Haugen, Jørgen Skancke, Marianne Aas, Marianne Rønsberg, Roman Netzer, Trond R. Størseth. Stavanger, September 2019 Dr Daniela M. Pampanin Project Manager 3 The Water Column Monitoring 2017 Final report Summary Introduction The programme commonly referred to as water column monitoring (WCM) is presented as set out in the Norwegian Environment Agency Guidelines M-408. The WCM involves the mapping of pollutants or biological effects of pollutants, using caged and wild caught organisms in the water column. Detailed requirements for environmental monitoring on the Norwegian continental shelf have earlier been compiled within regulations relating to conducting petroleum activities (Aktivitetsforskriften). Aim of the project The WCM aims to document whether and to what extent organisms in Norwegian waters are affected by pollution generated by oil and gas activities. The requirement to conduct monitoring of the water column is not solely related to produced water (PW) discharges, but include relevant chemical additives and seeps or leaks from the seabed, as well as any other relevant discharges. Therefore, it was important to ensure that the scope of the monitoring was proportional to the expected risk (section 1.3). Methods The WCM 2017 program was designed to evaluate effects of oil and gas activities near field (i.e. around selected platforms) and at regional scale, combining two programs previously called “effect monitoring” and “condition monitoring”. It was carried out in three different regions of the North Sea: Tampen area, Central North Sea, and Egersund Bank (reference area) (section 2.1 and 2.2). Additionally, focus has been placed on studying the water column conditions around the Statfjord A and B platforms (Tampen area). The monitoring priorities were to determine: • potential effects of oil and gas related discharges in mussels caged around the Statfjord A and B platforms (WP1), • potential effects of oil and gas related discharges in wild fish caught around the Statfjord A and B platforms (WP2), • potential effects of oil and gas related discharges in wild fish caught in three regions of the North Sea (WP3), • the potential use of zooplankton as a monitoring tool for studying the effect of oil and gas related discharges (zooplankton-based monitoring) (WP4). In addition, priority was given to a research study on method development for DNA adducts in fish (WP5). WP 5 results will be presented as a separate report. Descriptions of WPs and references to report sections are presented in Table A to provide a quick overview of the project. Chemical and biological results are described in this report and discussed in relation to the stations distance from a PW discharge point (i.e. Statfjord A and B), or in relation to an area (i.e. Tampen, Central North Sea, Egersund Bank). In addition, biological marker results were 4 integrated using the Integrative Biological Response (IBR) index (section 3.4.1). This data treatment was developed to integrate biochemical, genotoxic and histochemical biomarkers by Beliaeff and Burgeot (2002). The method is based on the relative differences between biomarkers in each given data set and it has been applied in previous WCM programs. For the first time the ‘biomarker bridges’ approach (Sanni et al., 2017a, b, c) was applied to make assessments of interest, such as indications about the obtained biomarker responses compared to discharges and to expected impacts and risks (section 3.4.2 and appendix 9). Table A. Quick overview of the project results, including work package aim and descriptions and references to report sections. Work package Aim Activity description Report section WP 1 Potential effects in mussels Chemical and biological analyses in Methods caged around the Statfjord A caged mussel 2.3.1/2.3.2/2.3.3 and B platforms Results 3.2/ 3.4.1 WP 2 and 3 Potential effects in wild fish Chemical and biological analyses in Methods caught in three regions of the wild caught fish 2.3.1/2.3.2/2.3.4 North Sea, with a focus around Results 3.3, 3.4.1 the Statfjord A and B platforms WP 4 Potential use of zooplankton as Sampling and analyses (PAH Appendix 1 a monitoring tool exposure parameters, zooplankton community composition) of copepods from the Tampen area WP 5 Method development for DNA Identification of DNA adducts in Separate report adducts in fish laboratory exposed haddock and selected field samples by LC-MS/MS. Results and discussion With regard to the caged mussel study, it is important to note the shift in mussel species distribution among Norwegian populations. In comparison with previous surveys, there has been a reduction (-6%) in M. edulis and an increase in hybrid species. Mussels were purchased from a farm in Trondheimsfjorden (Norway), this source has been used previously for the WCM program. Since different genera may have differing capabilities to accumulate and respond to pollutants, this issue will need to be addressed in future WCM programs. The sum of PAH concentrations in mussel tissues showed higher body burden concentrations in organisms that were caged closest to both Statfjord A and B platforms. However, these values were lower than those from previous surveys. For PAH accumulation, naphthalenes were the most abundant followed by phenanthrenes and dibenzothiophenes. The source of the PAHs has been identified as petroleum, as in previous surveys at Gullfaks C, Troll C and Ekofisk. Regarding the biological effect parameters, some highlighted a stress condition present in mussels caged at Statfjord A and B. When comparing results against ICES assessment criteria, mussels appear to be in stress conditions, but compensating, as confirmed by the physiological level measurements (stress on stress and condition index) and their ability to maintain reproductive development (e.g spawning status). However, signs of more severe stress conditions were recorded in mussels caged 500 m from Statfjord A, by means of lysosomal membrane stability and micronucleus (MN) frequency in haemocytes. In particular, in 4 stations close to the platform, MN frequency values were above the elevated response (ER) 5 limit suggested by ICES, showing a clear sign of the presence of contaminants with genotoxicity potential. Data integration using IBR/n confirmed that stressed organisms were compensating, by showing IBR/n values within the range of the two reference stations (since mussels from both stations are considered to originate from a known clean area, it can be considered that all the stations with IBR/n within the range of the reference value are not impacted). Two stations located at 500 m from Stafjord A had the highest IBR/n values, indicating a more severe level of stress. Results also highlights the importance of having more than one reference group in the monitoring. Regarding analyses in wild caught fish, four areas were considered: Statfjord, Tampen, Central North Sea and Egersund bank (as a reference).