Rcgggy! COPY ~,. -~:.,' --zsi!ot'Y Reporton t8 ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS of a SUPERTANKER PORT on the , LOANPPPy PN; y TEXAS GULF COAST Prepared f or TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY SEA GRANT COLLEGE PROGRAM in the NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION by NATIONAL SE,! ~;.-!~T .."' PELL L'.I!i'J';;r' <',~., Texas A&M University URJ, NaR,' AvHhbEII If>',i Wesleyp J~es ph D . P E. NARRAGANSETT,R >C~,sbZ Roy W. Harm, Jr ~, Ph D ~~ P E ~ David R. Basso, Ph.D., P.E. Daniel M. Hragg, P.E. Joseph S. Osoba, Ph.D. Jake Dameron, H.S. Douglas Von Gonten, Ph,D, Takashi Ichiye, Ph.D. Rezneat Darnell, Ph.D. This report was prepared by a Texas A&M University inter- disciplinary team consisting of members from Ocean Engineering, Physical Oceanography, Petroleum Engineering, Industrial Economics, Marine Biology and Environmental Engineering for the Sea Grant Program. Team members included: Dr. Wesley P. James, Proj ect Director Environmental Engineering Division Dr. Roy W. Harm, Jr. Environmental Engineering Division Dr. David R. Basco Coastal and Ocean Engineering Daniel N. Bragg Industrial Economics Dr. Joseph S. Osoba Petroleum Engineering Dr. Douglas Von Gonten Petroleum Engineering Dr. Rezneat Darnell Narine Biology and Oceanography Dr. Takashi Ichiye Physical Oceanography Graduate Students: Jake Dameron, Recreation and Parks Howard Balanoff, Urban Planning Richard Defenbaugh, Biology Care Cashman, Oceanography William Daniel, Petroleum Engineering Carl Muska, Oceanography Thomas Sellers, Oceanography Undergraduate Students: Nike Parr, Civil Engineering David Garver, Chemical Engineering Gary Gloyna, Civil Engineering Richard Holder, Coastal and Ocean Engineering Tom Clancy, Petroleum Engineering COVER: Satellite photo of the Texas coast from East Natagorda Bay in the upper left, to Galveston Bay in the lower right. The location of the two port sites considered in this study are shown on the photo. Photo by NASA.! ABSTRACT The objective of this study was to conduct an evaluation of. the environmental impact of a deep-sea port off the Texas coast. The study considered both the non-spill impact of construction and operation of the port and the potential oil spill impact an the coastal environment. The time and financial constraints of the project limited the study to existing on-hand knowledge. The scope of this study was limited to two terminal locations, three designs of port facilities, and three sizes of oil spills. The study also considered the environ- mental impact of not constructing the port but expanding the present methods to meet the oil import needs of the area. The two port sites considered in this study were Site 1, located 29 7 km! statute miles southeast of Freeport, Texas in 95 feet 9 m! of water, and Site 2, located 11 statute miles 8 km! off- shore in 60 feet 8 m! of water. The nearshore site would require dredging a 1000-ft 00 m! wide 13 statute mile 0 km! long channel to a depth of 90 ft 8 m!. The major physical, biological and cultural features of the Texas Coastal Zone that might be impacted by the supertanker activity were inventoried. Models were developed to predict where oil from potential offshore oil spills would go and which environmental features would be affected. In this study of the impact af an accidental spill on the coastal area, the probability of occurrence was included in the evalu- ation. The probability that a specific environmental element will be impacted was taken as the product of the probability that the oil spill will occur times the probability that if it does occur it will reach that specific environmental element, A third factor that was included in this evaluation is the probability that if the impact did occur, that the concentration and contact time will be high enough to cause harm ta the elements. Adequate information was not available from existing literature in many areas to accurately evaluate the impact on the environment. However, for the purpose of this prelim- inary environmental assessment, the methodology was developed, much of the missing data assumed, and the impact estimated. This project was conducted through the Sea Grant program in the National Ocean and Atmospheric Agency NOAA! for the President's Council on Environmental Quality CEQ!. An interdisciplinary study team consisting af nine members was formed from various divisions of the University. The following conclusions and recammendatians were developed by the team. It should be pointed out however, that the team does nat unanimausly support all the conclusions and recom- mendations. 1. Texas is fortunate in having barrier islands along much of the coast. These islands will tend to protect the bays and estuaries from the effects of a potent'ial offshare ail spill. 2. Winds and sea conditions in the western gulf are such that ail spill containment and cantrol are feasible much of the time. 3. If oil is spilled, it will require 2 to 3 days travel time to reach the shore. 4. The offshore supertanker port should reduce the potential for oil spills to occur within the estuaries. Oil spill containment and control procedures must be a planned and integral part of the port activity. 6 ~ The impact on the environment of construction for the off- shore site Site 1! will be minimal. 7 The impact of construction for the offshore port site Site 1! will be less than the impact of the nearshore site Site 2!. 8 ~ The locations selected for this study seem to be well chosen from an environmental standpoint. 9. The continuous, low-level operational oil spill will have minimal impact on the marine environment. There is no reason that the spill volumes used in this study should be attained. The annual 500-ton spill is not expected to affect the estuaries and oil spill control procedures could be expected to be affective most of the time. 12. The potential 30,000-ton oil spill could cause severe environmental damage, unless adequate control and contain- ment procedures are included as a part of the port design and operation. 13. Proceed with caution. There is no environmental reason for not pursuing the project further with designs, better environmental studies and contingency plans. Environmental field studies are necessary to collect data lacking for this study and develop baseline data. TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page INTRODUCTION Statement of Problem Port Facilities Oil Spill Characteristics 6 Approach ENVIRONMENTAL INVENTORY Texas Coastal Zone . 11 Population Features .11 Weather .12 Physical Environmental Features of the Coast 14 Texas Coastal Shoreline 23 Parks, Recreation Areas, and Wildlife Refuges . , . 33 Wildlife in the Beach Zones . 45 Wildlife in the Estuaries and Coastal Marshes . 51 Wildlife on the Barrier Islands and Uplands . 56 Hydrography of the Continental Shelf off Texas . 57 Temperature, Salinity and Oxygen 57 Waves 58 Winds ~ t ~ a t ~ ~ t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 58 Surface Currents off Texas Coasts 62 Littoral Transport 62 Bottom Topography and Sediments of the Texas Shelf Biology of the Texas Coast Benthic Algae 70 Phytoplankton 70 Zooplankton and Micronekton 71 Benthic Invertebrates 73 Life Histories of Important Migratory Species 81 CONTENTS Continued! Chapter Page Continued! References 91 Parks, Recreation Areas, and Wildlife Refuges 91 Hydrography of the Continental Shelf off Texas. ~ ~ s 93 Biology of the Texas Coast. ~ + ~ 94 PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS OF AN OFFSHORE PORT ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 9 9 Need for Offshore Port 99 Demand for Crude Oil. 99 Present Harbor Facilities 100 Impact on National Issues and Needs 101 Why are Deepwater Terminals Needed in Texas?. ~ . ~ 102 Economic Impact of a Deepwater Terminal in Texas. 105 Alternatives to an Offshore Port 107 Deepening of Existing Harbors 108 Lightening at Sea to Enter Shallow Ports. 109 Transshipment in the Bahamas. 111 Total Use of Smaller Vessels. 113 References 114 IV GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF OTL. Phases of Oil. 116 Evaporation 116 Solution. 118 Emulsification. 118 Precipitation 119 Decay i ~ e i ~ 120 Rates 120 Review of Oil Spills 125 Oil Spills from Existing Shipping Procedures in Texas. 125 Oil Spills from Offshore Drilling and Production Operations. 127 The Effect of Weather on Supertankers . 128 Long and Short Term Environmental Effects of Oil Spills 130 vii CONTENTS Continued! Chapter Page Continued! Effects of Oil on Environmental Elements 136 Offshore 136 Nearshore 137 Surf Zone 138 Effects of Oil on the Beach . - - 139 Estuaries 140 Parks and Recreation Areas . 141 Marsh 141 Livestock 144 Wildlife . 145 Effects of Oil on Birds 146 Effect of Oil on Marine and Estuarine Organisms 148 References 152 Phases of Oil and Long and Short Term Environmental Effects of Oil Spills . 152 Effects of Oil . , . , 153 SPREAD AND TRANSPORT OF THE OIL . 157 Model . , . , . 158 Cont inuous Spill 169 Accidental Spills 173 500-Ton Spill 177 30,000-Ton Spill 183 References. 192 CONTENTS Continued! Chapter Page CONTROL AND CLEANUP OF OIL . 193 Containment at Terminal . ~ . 193 Containment at Sea. ~ . 202 Soxbents 211 Sinking Agents 212 Burning Agents 213 Dispersants. 214 Summary Containment at Sea 220 Containment at Coastal Inlets . 221 Beach Cleanup 226 Summary of Treatment and Disposal Methodology . 229 References. 232 Oil Spill Control. 232 Beach Cleanup. 235 VII ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT . , . ~ . 237 Effects of Construction on the Environment. 237 Location No. 1 Single Port Mooring System and Platform!. 239 Location No. 2 Alternative A! 241 Location No. 2 Alternative B! 258 Submarine Shore Oil Transport Pipeline 266 Summary Comment. 267 Impact of Oil Spills. 270 Model. 270 Assessment ~ ~ 0 'I ~ 283 Summary of Oil Impact. 293 References. 303 Effects of Construction on the Environment . ~ . 303 Impact of Oil Spills . , . 306 VIII CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. 307 CONTENTS Continued! Appendix Page PHYSICAL FEATURES OF THE COASTAL AREA 317 Description of Environmental Resources 317 Bays, Lagoons, and Estuaries 319 Enclosed Bay. 319 River Influenced Bay. 320 Tidally Influenced Open Bay 321 Wind Tidal Flats.