DOCSLIB.ORG

Programmatic Environmental Assessment for Grid 9 Site-Specific

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Programmatic Environmental Assessment for Grid 9 Site-Specific OCS EIS/EA MMS 2008-026 Programmatic Environmental Assessment for Grid 9 Site-Specific Evaluation of Energy Resource Technology, Inc.’s Supplemental Development Operations Coordination Document, S-7156 Phoenix Project Green Canyon Blocks 236 and 237 U.S. Department of the Interior Minerals Management Service Gulf of Mexico OCS Region OCS EIS/EA MMS 2008-026 Programmatic Environmental Assessment for Grid 9 Site-Specific Evaluation of Energy Resource Technology, Inc.’s Supplemental Development Operations Coordination Document, S-7156 Phoenix Project Green Canyon Blocks 236 and 237 Author Minerals Management Service Gulf of Mexico OCS Region Published by U.S. Department of the Interior Minerals Management Service New Orleans Gulf of Mexico OCS Region May 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ..............................................................................................iii FIGURES.....................................................................................................................................................ix TABLES ......................................................................................................................................................ix ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ....................................................................................................xi INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................1 1. PROPOSED ACTION ............................................................................................................................9 1.1. Purpose of the Proposed Action..................................................................................................9 1.2. Need for the Proposed Action.....................................................................................................9 1.3. Description of the Proposed Action ............................................................................................9 1.3.1. Proposed Action ...........................................................................................................9 1.3.2. Background ................................................................................................................10 1.3.3. Schedule of Activities ................................................................................................10 1.3.4. Equipment and Drilling System .................................................................................11 1.3.5. Support Facilities........................................................................................................11 1.3.6. Transportation Operations..........................................................................................12 1.3.7. New and Unusual Technology ...................................................................................12 1.3.8. Impacts from Potential Geological Hazards...............................................................12 1.4. Offshore Discharges and Waste Disposal.................................................................................12 1.5. Potential Impact-Producing Factors..........................................................................................13 1.6. Regulatory Framework .............................................................................................................15 2. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED ......................................................................................................15 2.1. Nonapproval of the Proposal.....................................................................................................15 2.2. Approval with Existing Mitigation ...........................................................................................15 2.3. Approval with Existing and/or Added Mitigation ....................................................................15 3. DESCRIPTIONS AND IMPACT ANALYSES OF THE AFFECTED RESOURCES.......................15 3.1. Physical Resources....................................................................................................................15 3.1.1. Water Quality .............................................................................................................16 3.1.1.1. Coastal Waters ..........................................................................................16 3.1.1.1.1. Description .............................................................................16 3.1.1.1.2. Impact Analysis......................................................................16 3.1.1.1.3. Cumulative Analysis ..............................................................17 3.1.1.2. Offshore Waters ........................................................................................18 3.1.1.2.1. Description .............................................................................18 3.1.1.2.2. Impact Analysis......................................................................20 3.1.1.2.3. Cumulative Analysis ..............................................................21 v 3.1.2. Air Quality..................................................................................................................21 3.1.2.1. Description................................................................................................21 3.1.2.2. Impact Analysis.........................................................................................22 3.1.2.3. Cumulative Analysis .................................................................................22 3.2 Biological Resources.................................................................................................................22 3.2.1. Sensitive Coastal Resources.......................................................................................22 3.2.1.1. Coastal Barrier Beaches and Associated Dunes........................................23 3.2.1.1.1. Description .............................................................................23 3.2.1.1.2. Impact Analysis......................................................................24 3.2.1.1.3 Cumulative Analysis ..............................................................25 3.2.1.2. Wetlands....................................................................................................26 3.2.1.2.1 Description .............................................................................26 3.2.1.2.2. Impact Analysis......................................................................27 3.2.1.2.3. Cumulative Analysis ..............................................................28 3.2.1.3. Alabama, Choctawhatchee, St. Andrew, and Perdido Key Beach Mice...29 3.2.1.3.1. Description .............................................................................29 3.2.1.3.2. Impact Analysis......................................................................30 3.2.1.3.3. Cumulative Analysis ..............................................................30 3.2.2. Sensitive Offshore Resources.....................................................................................31 3.2.2.1. Deepwater Benthic Communities .............................................................31 3.2.2.1.1. Nonchemosynthetic Communities .........................................31 3.2.2.1.1.1. Description.......................................................31 3.2.2.1.1.2. Impact Analysis ...............................................32 3.2.2.1.1.3. Cumulative Analysis........................................33 3.2.2.1.2. Chemosynthetic Communities ...............................................33 3.2.2.1.2.1. Description.......................................................33 3.2.2.1.2.2. Impact Analysis ...............................................34 3.2.2.1.2.3. Cumulative Analysis........................................34 3.2.2.2. Marine Mammals ......................................................................................35 3.2.2.2.1. Description .............................................................................35 3.2.2.2.2. Impact Analysis......................................................................35 3.2.2.2.3. Cumulative Analysis ..............................................................36 3.2.2.3. Sea Turtles.................................................................................................37 3.2.2.3.1. Description .............................................................................37 3.2.2.3.2. Impact Analysis......................................................................37 3.2.2.3.3. Cumulative Analysis ..............................................................39 3.2.2.4. Essential Fish Habitat and Fish Resources................................................39 3.2.2.4.1. Description .............................................................................39 3.2.2.4.2. Impact Analysis......................................................................40 3.2.2.4.3. Cumulative Analysis ..............................................................41 3.2.2.5. Gulf Sturgeon............................................................................................41 3.2.2.5.1. Description .............................................................................41 3.2.2.5.2. Impact Analysis......................................................................42 3.2.2.5.3. Cumulative Analysis ..............................................................43
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Plan Coordinator, FO, Plans Section (MS 5231)
    UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT August 5, 2019 MEMORANDUM To: Public Information (MS 5030) From: Plan Coordinator, FO, Plans Section (MS 5231) Subj ect: Public Information copy of plan Control # S-07968 Type Supplemental Exploration Plan Lease(s) OCS-G36134 Elock - 629 Mississippi Canyon Area Operator LLOG Exploration Offshore, L.L.C. Description Subsea Well C and C-ALT Rig Type Not Found Attached is a copy of the subject plan. It has been deemed submitted as of this date and is under review for approval Leslie Wilson Plan Coordinator Site Type/Name Botm Lse/Area/Blk Surface Location Surf Lse/Area/Blk WELL/C G36134/MC/629 6100 FNL, 5062 FEL G36134/MC/629 WELL/C-ALT G36134/MC/629 6100 FNL, 5112 FEL G36134/MC/629 LLOG EXPLORATION OFFSHORE, L.L.C. 1001 Ochsner Boulevard, Suite 100 Covington, Louisiana 70433 SUPPLEMENTAL EXPLORATION PLAN OCS-G 36134 LEASE MISSISSIPPI CANYON BLOCK 629 Prepared By: Sue Sachitana Regulatory Specialist LLOG Exploration Offshore, L.L.C. 985-801-4300-Office 985-801-4716-Direct [email protected] Date: July 10, 2019 LLOG EXPLORATION OFFSHORE, L.L.C. SUPPLEMENTAL EXPLORATION PLAN OCS-G 36134 MISSISSIPPI CANYON BLOCK 629 APPENDIX A Plan Contents APPENDIX B General Information APPENDIX C Geological, Geophysical Information APPENDIX D H2S Information APPENDIX E Biological, Physical and Socioeconomic Information APPENDIX F Waste and Discharge Information APPENDIX G Air Emissions Information APPENDIX H Oil Spill Information APPENDIX I Environmental Monitoring Information APPENDIX J Lease Stipulation Information APPENDIX K Environmental Mitigation Measures Information APPENDIX L Related Facilities and Operations Information APPENDIX M Support Vessels and Aircraft Information APPENDIX N Onshore Support Facilities Information APPENDIX O Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) Information APPENDIX P Environmental Impact Analysis APPENDIX Q Administrative Information Mississippi Canyon Block 629, OCS-G-36134 Supplemental Exploration Plan APPENDIX A PLAN CONTENTS (30 CFR Part 550.211 and 550.241) A.
    [Show full text]
  • Oil Spill by the Oil Rig “Deepwater Horizon”
    Case 2:10-md-02179-CJB-SS Document 21088 Filed 07/20/16 Page 1 of 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA IN RE: OIL SPILL BY THE OIL § MDL No. 2179 RIG “DEEPWATER HORIZON” § IN THE GULF OF MEXICO, § SECTION: J ON APRIL 20, 2010 § This document relates to all cases. § JUDGE BARBIER § MAG. JUDGE SHUSHAN ORDER [BP’s Motion for Order of Disposal of Material (Rec. doc. 19381)] CONSIDERING BP Exploration & Production Inc., BP America Production Company, and BP America Inc.’s (“BP”) motion for an order governing the disposal of source material and other substances, it is hereby ORDERED: 1. WHEREAS BP collected oil and other material from various containment and recovery vessels at the well site and from surface recovery efforts during the summer of 2010; 2. And whereas BP also collected volumes of surrogate oil for use in contexts where actual Macondo oil was not essential; 3. And whereas BP, since 2010, has advertised the availability of such materials, and has made, and continues to make, such recovered and collected material available to interested researchers; 4. And whereas BP has satisfied the demand for such materials and that demand has almost completely ended; 5. And whereas the volumes of oil and other materials currently held by BP far exceed the demand that reasonably might be expected in the future; Case 2:10-md-02179-CJB-SS Document 21088 Filed 07/20/16 Page 2 of 3 6. And whereas BP has moved this Court seeking to dispose properly of superfluous oil and other material, but to continue to maintain supplies that still exceed the likely future demand by researchers and scientists; 7.
    [Show full text]
  • Pdf Fiolek, A., Pikula, L., Voss, B., 2010
    775 A publication of CHEMICAL ENGINEERING TRANSACTIONS VOL. 48, 2016 The Italian Association of Chemical Engineering Online at www.aidic.it/cet Guest Editors: Eddy de Rademaeker, Peter Schmelzer Copyright © 2016, AIDIC Servizi S.r.l., ISBN 978-88-95608-39-6; ISSN 2283-9216 DOI: 10.3303/CET1648130 A Thorough Analysis of the Engineering Solutions Deployed to Stop the Oil Spill Following the Deepwater Horizon Disaster Thibaut Eude*, Aldo Napoli, Franck Guarnieri MINES ParisTech, Centre for research on risks and crises, Rue Claude Daunesse, B.P. 207, 06904 Sophia-Antipolis Cedex, France; PSL Research University [email protected] The Deepwater Horizon drilling accident that occurred on 20 April 2010 was a two-fold catastrophe. The initial total loss of the drilling rig was followed by one of the worst environmental disasters in recent history. The four million barrels of oil that were released into the Gulf of Mexico continue to impact human activities in the area. The Macondo well incident (Mississippi Canyon 252-1, leased by BP as the primary operator) was the first deep subsea blowout in the history of the oil and gas industry, and both the United States’ government and the private sector were unprepared to deal with it. All of the safety system’s lines of defence failed and the response required multiple courses of actions to be taken to address an unprecedented situation. It was imperative to deliver the best engineering solutions under intense and ongoing pressure in a very harsh and highly stressful operational environment. In this paper we review the engineering solutions considered by the response teams.
    [Show full text]
  • Plan Coordinator, FO, Plans Section (MS 5231)
    UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT October 14, 2020 MEMORANDUM To: Public Information (MS 5030) From: Plan Coordinator, FO, Plans Section (MS 5231) Subject: Public Information copy of plan Control # - S-08025 Type - Supplemental Exploration Plan Lease(s) - OCS-G33335 Block - 642 Keathley Canyon Area OCS-G33341 Block - 686 Keathley Canyon Area OCS-G33918 Block - 687 Keathley Canyon Area Operator - LLOG Exploration Offshore, L.L.C. Description - Subsea Wells D, ALT D, E, and ALT E Rig Type - DP Semisubmersible and Drillship Attached is a copy of the subject plan. It has been deemed submitted as of this date and is under review for approval. Chiquita Hill Plan Coordinator Site Type/Name Botm Lse/Area/Blk Surface Location Surf Lse/Area/Blk WELL/ALT D G33335/KC/642 888 FNL, 1186 FEL G33341/KC/686 WELL/ALT E G33918/KC/687 990 FNL, 1193 FEL G33341/KC/686 WELL/D G33335/KC/642 938 FNL, 1192 FEL G33341/KC/686 WELL/E G33918/KC/687 940 FNL, 1190 FEL G33341/KC/686 LLOG EXPLORATION OFFSHORE, L.L.C. 1001 Ochsner Boulevard, Suite 100 Covington, Louisiana 70433 SUPPLEMENTAL PLAN OF EXPLORATION OCS-G-33341 / OCS-G-33918 / OCS-G-33335 LEASES KEATHLEY CANYON BLOCK 686 / 687 / 642 PUBLIC INFORMATION COPY Prepared By: Sue Sachitana Regulatory Specialist LLOG Exploration Offshore, L.L.C. 985-801-4300 – Office 985-801-4716 – Direct [email protected] Date: September 16, 2020 Supplemental Exploration Plan Plan S-8025 Keathley Canyon Block 686 / 687 / 642 OCS-G-33341 / OCS-G-33918 / OCS – G- 33335 Leases AMENDED COPY RECORD OF CHANGES DATE SECTION-PAGE BRIEF SYMOPSIS 9/23/2020 Appendix E Paragraph G corrected area and block from Mississippi Canyon Block 505 to Keathley Canyon Block 686.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Flow Rate Estimates for the Deepwater Horizon / Macondo Well Oil Spill
    National Incident Command, Interagency Solutions Group, Flow Rate Technical Group Assessment of Flow Rate Estimates for the Deepwater Horizon / Macondo Well Oil Spill U.S. Department of the Interior Cover: Satellite image of the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico on April 29, 2010 (NASA Goddard Space Flight Center photo); oil floating on the surface of the water in the Gulf of Mexico on June 12, 2010 (photo by Petty Officer First Class Tasha Tully). Assessment of Flow Rate Estimates for the Deepwater Horizon / Macondo Well Oil Spill National Incident Command, Interagency Solutions Group, Flow Rate Technical Group Prepared by: Marcia McNutt, U.S. Geological Survey: Flow Rate Technical Group Chair Richard Camilli, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution: WHOI Flow Rate Measurement Group Lead George Guthrie, Department of Energy, National Energy Technology Lab: Flow Rate Technical Group, Nodal Analysis Team Lead Paul Hsieh, U.S. Geological Survey, National Research Program Victor Labson, U.S. Geological Survey: Flow Rate Technical Group, Mass Balance Team Lead Bill Lehr, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: Flow Rate Technical Group, Plume Analysis Team Lead Don Maclay, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement: Flow Rate Technical Group, Reservoir Modeling Team Lead Art Ratzel, Department of Energy, Sandia National Laboratories: DOE-NNSA Team Lead Mark Sogge, U.S. Geological Survey: Flow Rate Technical Group Deputy Chair March 10, 2011 U.S. Department of the Interior Suggested citation: McNutt, M, R. Camilli, G. Guthrie, P. Hsieh, V. Labson, B. Lehr, D. Maclay, A. Ratzel, and M. Sogge. 2011. Assessment of Flow Rate Estimates for the Deepwater Horizon / Macondo Well Oil Spill.
    [Show full text]
  • ALTERNATIVE RENEWABLE ENERGY Interactive Qualifying
    September 10, 2010 ALTERNATIVE RENEWABLE ENERGY Interactive Qualifying Project Report completed in partial fulfillment of the Bachelor of Science degree at Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, MA Submitted to: Professor Mayer Humi Produced By: Dave Dwyer Jose Grasso John Kent Christopher Stanton Carlos Urdaneta ABSTRACT Scientists, environmentalists and engineers are generating solutions to create a sustainable energy infrastructure in order to maintain all technological advances and protect the environment. With this project, the group researched the advantages and disadvantages of various fuels. Issues include these energy sources’ impact on the environment and health, safety, as well as current and future energy legislations. As a result of this research, the group has compared all forms of energy by creating a ranking system, and will reveal which are the most practical and sustainable forms of energy. 1 | P a g e TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary……………………..………………………………6 Introduction……………………………..……………………………….8 National Energy Policy……………………………..………………...…9 Chapter 1…………………………………………………………………………………..9 Chapter 2…………………………………………………………………………………..9 Chapter 3………………………………………………………..………………………..10 Chapter 4…………………………………………………………..……………………..10 Chapter 5……………………………………………………………..…………..………11 Chapter 6……………………………………………………………..………..…………12 Chapter 7……………………………………………………………...…………………12 Chapter 8…………………………………………………………………………………14 Natural Gas………………………………………………………….....16 Role…………………………………………………………………………...……….…16 Consumption…..…………………………………………………….……..………….…16
    [Show full text]
  • Fox News All-Stars
    Page 1 325 of 1000 DOCUMENTS Fox News Network June 4, 2010 Friday SHOW: FOX SPECIAL REPORT WITH BRET BAIER 6:40 PM EST Fox News All-Stars BYLINE: Bret Baier, Charles Krauthammer, Fred Barnes, Juan Williams SECTION: NEWS; Domestic LENGTH: 2309 words (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: We are going to cut through any bu- reaucratic red tape, any problems that we've got, and we will fix the problems that have been identified, and we'll keep on coming back until we have dealt with an unprecedented crisis. This report is sign that our economy is getting stronger by the day. I want to emphasize that most of the jobs this month that we're seeing in the statistics represent workers who have been hired to complete the 2010 census. (END VIDEO CLIP) BAIER: Two stops today. President Obama today earlier in Maryland talking about the unemployment rate dropping to 9.7, but the markets tanked on that news because almost all of the jobs were created were for the census, as he talked about. He's down in the Gulf region right now and he has cancelled a planned trip to Australia and to Indonesia because of the Gulf oil spill. He is dealing with a lot. How is he doing? Let's bring in our panel, Fred Barnes, Executive Editor of "The Weekly Standard," Juan Williams, news analyst for Na- tional Public Radio, and syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer. Not to mention, Fred, that the national debt is increasing, over $13 trillion.
    [Show full text]
  • Lessons in Disaster
    - - - ENERGY World alarm: The consequences of the explosion are Lessons immense in disaster As the well is finally capped, have governments and the oil and gas industry learned anything from the BP Deepwater Horizon catastrophe? By Ben Sampson he explosion on BP's committee inquiry into deepwater drilling ministers need to stop BP’s plans and launch Deepwater Horizon rig on 20 and said that the number of annual a comprehensive plan to go beyond oil.” April killed 11 people. The oil inspections on drilling rigs in UK waters Malcolm Webb, chief executive of trade Tleak lasted 87 days and spewed would be doubled. The energy and climate association Oil and Gas UK, says there has an estimated 4.1 million barrels change committee is to examine the hazards not been a blow-out – an uncontrolled of crude oil into the Gulf of Mexico. It was and risks of drilling in the sea west of the release of crude oil or natural gas in the well the world’s largest accidental oil spill and a Shetlands where one of Britain’s deepest bore – in UK waters in 20 years and that a nightmare for the environment, the local wells is due to be drilled in October – by BP. cessation of drilling and a moratorium are economy and BP. The company wants to drill to depths of unnecessary. “We can be relatively confident The well is now sealed with cement, and 4,265ft in a field 60 miles west of the that the chances of the Gulf of Mexico BP’s clean-up operation is moving from islands, subject to government approval.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploring New Frontiers - When Experience and Quality Matters © Anadarko
    exploring new frontiers - when experience and quality matters © Anadarko Commercial Marine Cruise & Ferries Oil & Gas Recreational Boats Navy Obstruction Lighting generations of experience Scandinavians have been trading light to other countries for thousands of years. The Vikings set sail in their longboats to discover new land, and to sell oil to be used in primitive lamps. They challenged the seas and the unknown in their open boats. Later on in history our seamen conquered the seven seas; expertise, innovation and hard work gave birth to new and exciting inventions. The first crude oil was discovered in the North Sea in the late 1960s. Local companies have reached a world leading position with oil technology, drilling rigs and offshore vessels. The same ambition to discover something new and to innovate was very much present in Birger Hatlebakk – the founder of Glamox. In the late 1940s, he started producing electrical material based on his own inventions in the city of Trondheim. A secret chemical formula allowed him to create high quality reflectors from standard aluminum. The company later moved to Molde. Today Glamox is a leading conglomerate within lighting, manufacturing innovative and recognised quality products for distribution world wide. Glamox set sail like the Vikings a long time before them, trading light in foreign waters. contents Generations of experience .............................................. 4 Innovative technology .................................................... 5 We have done our outmost to make sure that Icebreaking innovation ................................................... 7 illustrations are correct at the date of publication. Health, safety and environment ........................................ 9 We appreciate the contribution of photos from Longterm relationship ....................................................11 companies represented in the brochure.
    [Show full text]
  • Remotely Operated Vehicles Involved in the Deepwater Horizon Response
    Remotely Operated Vehicles involved in the Deepwater Horizon response Figure 1 Snapshot of the fleet showing the Discoverer Enterprise drillship in the centre, the Q4000 MODU at the top right, and the Viking Poseidon to the lower right. Source: Reuters The subsea activities being undertaken in response to the tragic incidents aboard the Deepwater Horizon semi- submersible mobile drilling unit (MODU) on April 20th 2010 have been performed by remotely operated vehicles (ROV). ROV are underwater robots powered and controlled from a surface vessel or platform via an umbilical. The ROV used are equipped with dual manipulators and are of a grouping known as “work-class” (WROV) as they perform the work that would have historically been undertaken by divers in shallow waters. The water depth at the Macondo well is approximately 1500m and although well out of the reach of divers, is not now considered especially deep when compared with some of the other oil and gas projects already in place or under development. All the WROV in use at the site are capable of working in depths of at least 3000m. Some autonomous underwater vehicles (AUV) are also being used to collect seawater samples and to map the extent of the oil in the water column. At the time of writing (end of June 2010), the situation at Macondo is that some fluid and gas is being diverted to the Helix Energy owned Q4000 semi-submersible MODU via a subsea manifold connected to the faulty blow-out preventer (BOP) that should have activated and sheared the drill pipe and sealed the well.
    [Show full text]
  • Talos Energy Is an Independent Oil and Gas Company Led by a Management Team with Decades of Experience in Offshore Exploration and Production
    Strong Sustainable Growth 2018 ANNUAL REPORT 66696.indd 1 3/28/19 7:07 AM Talos Energy is an independent oil and gas company led by a management team with decades of experience in offshore exploration and production. We are experts at acquiring operated shelf and developed deepwater assets in the Gulf of Mexico, then exploring, exploiting and optimizing those assets using innovative techniques and cutting-edge seismic technologies. NYSE: TALO 66696.indd 2 3/28/19 7:07 AM LETTER TO SHAREHOLDERS 2018 was a historic year for Talos Energy as we completed and fully integrated our transformative merger with Stone Energy. The merger signifi cantly expanded the scale and operational breadth of Talos, and its benefi ts were immediately noticeable. ddi onally, the merger set the stage for us to more broadly share base and add signifi cant new volumes in 2019. In addi on, I’m very Aour story and values as a publicly-traded company focused on posi ve excited about numerous drilling prospects that we have iden fi ed free cash fl ow, moderate, sustainable growth and balance sheet discipline. and are currently evalua ng. Some of these prospects are on previously In 2018, Talos delivered solid fi nancial performance and successfully held Talos leases while others have been added through our targeted executed on a number of complex projects and we expect more of the business development eff orts. same in 2019 and beyond. Upon closing of the merger with Stone, we focused on lower-risk We also believe in our diff eren ated strategy, which we have refi ned but high impact projects that could grow produc on in 2018 while and validated over nearly two decades.
    [Show full text]
  • Jul 2010 Edition
    Biannual Jul 2010 Vol XI Issue 2 A Publication of the Indian Coast Guard From the Director General’s Desk Offshore oil and gas production is clearly more challenging than onshore work due to the harsh and complex maritime environment. The operation involves environment risks, most notably due to oil spills from blow-outs, explosions, leaks and any other form of accident on and around platform. The sinking of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig, and the consequent challenges it posed to the US government, the US Coast Guard, the environment protection agencies, fishermen and the general public living near the Gulf of Mexico coast, besides the polluter BP merits detailed study. The Deepwater oil spill ranks as one of the biggest spills in the world, and the pollution response actions taken is one of the largest ever undertaken, with more than 5500 vessels, 120 aircraft, 50,000 personnel and deployment of more than 1000 kilometers of boom. Since the day the incident took place, it has been a testing period for all agencies involved in the response. The latest technologies available for cleanup viz. underwater application of oil spill dispersants, employment of fishing vessels and conversion of vessels of opportunity for skimming operations and innovative shoreline protection measures, were employed. In order to highlight various issues emerging from the Deepwater Horizon incident, articles on offshore drilling, international laws governing offshore operations, the operations undertaken for Deepwater Horizon have been included in this edition of Blue Waters for the benefit of the readers. The past six months also witnessed two minor oil spills that affected Indian shores, viz.
    [Show full text]