57
Supplemental Technical Analyses for Unified Command Taylor Energy Mississippi Canyon Block 20 A Dr. Richard Camilli Navistry Corp. 1 Dec 18, 2015
Supplemental Technical Analyses for Unified Command
Taylor Energy Mississippi Canyon Block 20 A
Dr. Richard Camilli
Navistry Corp.
1 Dec 18, 2015
Eight years of sheen observations (2000+ daily aerial overflights) indicate that the surface sheen originating at MC20 is intermittent (with periods of no observable surface sheen) and variable in size (1 sigma >> mean).
2 Dec 18, 2015
Variability in sheen volume is strongly correlated with sediment disturbance Largest releases coincide with on-site intervention activity
A) Pipeline decommissioning and abandonment; B) Commencement of intervention well drilling and completion of IW21; C) Containment dome installation and shallow hazard survey; D) Completion of IW19; E) Drilling and completion of IW16; F) Drilling and completion of IW04; G) Drilling and completion of IW13; H) Drilling and completion of IW01; I) Drilling and completion of IW11; J) Drilling and completion of IW17; K) Drilling and completion of IW10; L) Deck removal, containment system repair, and debris collection; M) Containment system repair; N) Sediment drop coring, box coring, and sonar survey. Note, the Y-axis scale of daily sheen size is truncated to permit better visualization of the 30 day running average, causing extreme outlier data points to be off scale.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
1507/
9/08
8/8/
089/
7/08
10/7
/08
11/6
/08
12/6
/08
1/5/
092/
4/09
3/6/
094/
5/09
5/5/
096/
4/09
7/4/
098/
3/09
9/2/
0910
/2/0
911
/1/0
912
/1/0
912
/31/
091/
30/1
03/
1/10
3/31
/10
4/30
/10
5/30
/10
6/29
/10
7/29
/10
8/28
/10
9/27
/10
10/2
7/10
11/2
6/10
12/2
6/10
1/25
/11
2/24
/11
3/26
/11
4/25
/11
5/25
/11
6/24
/11
7/24
/11
8/23
/11
9/22
/11
10/2
2/11
11/2
1/11
12/2
1/11
1/20
/12
2/19
/12
3/20
/12
4/19
/12
5/19
/12
6/18
/12
7/18
/12
8/17
/12
9/16
/12
10/1
6/12
11/1
5/12
12/1
5/12
1/14
/13
2/13
/13
daily
repo
rted
she
en s
ize
(gal
lons
)
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
10,000
11,000
12,000
13,000
14,000
15,000
16,000
cum
ulat
ive
obse
rved
she
en (g
allo
ns)
morning overflight dataupper standard deviation30 day averagelower standard deviationcumulative observed totalLinear (morning overflight data)
MA B C D E F G H I J K L N
3 Dec 18, 2015
Sheen size also exhibits correlation with lunar cycle and phase SHEEN SIZE VARIABILITY COORELATES WITH LUNAR FORTNIGHTLY PERIOD (13.65 DAYS)
4 Dec 18, 2015
POST-INTERVENTION SHEEN SIZE MAXIMA CORRESPOND TO NEW MOON PHASES
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1000
0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360
Full waning New waxing Full
5 Dec 18, 2015
Overflight data indicate that wind speed influences apparent sheen volume SHEEN SIZE EXHIBITS LOGRITHMIC CORRELATION WITH WIND SPEED
118.09
47.05
22.18
7.54
3.13
12.08
6.72
3.66
1.55
0.72
6.27
3.97
2.15
0.58
0.22
0.1
1.0
10.0
100.0
1000.0
0-5 kts 6-10 kts 11-15 kts 16-20 kts 21-25 kts
wind speed
shee
n si
ze (g
allo
ns)
max mean median
mean trendy = -5.7987Ln(x) + 18.541
R2 =0.9985
median trend y = -3.1326Ln(x) + 9.9836
R2 =0.9805
max trendy = -37.536Ln(x) + 119.84
R2 = 0.9852
WIND SPEED CORRELATION: 270% higher mean sheen size when wind speed below 10 kts than when wind speed equal to or higher than 10 kts.
6 Dec 18, 2015
DAILY OVERFLIGHT ESTIMATES OF SHEEN LENGTH
0.0
2.5
5.0
7.5
10.0
12.5
15.0
17.5
20.0
22.5
25.0
27.5
30.0
32.5
35.0
1/1/2008 1/1/2009 1/1/2010 1/1/2011 1/1/2012 1/1/2013 1/1/2014 1/1/2015
DATE
LEN
GTH
(MIL
ES)
length30 per. Mov. Avg. (length)
Sheen length strongly correlates with seasonality: maximum lengths recorded during summer months and minimum lengths recorded during winter months.
7 Dec 18, 2015
Supplemental Technical Analyses for Unified Command
Taylor Energy Mississippi Canyon Block 20 A January 20, 2016 presentation Version 1; December 20, 2015
9
Dr. Christopher Reddy
consultant
Woods Hole, MA
V1; 12/20/15
Sediment collection, analysis, and
interpretation at the MC20 site (2012/2013)
10 V1; 12/20/15
11
1. Thorough and approved plans.
V1; 12/20/15
12
2. Best practices: sample management and analysis (QA/QC).
V1; 12/20/15
Objectives for July 2012 and Feb 2013 sediment sampling
• Determine the vertical and horizontal extent of petroleum-hydrocarbon contamination.
• Generally characterize the petroleum hydrocarbons detected.
• Use sediment data to compare to surface sheens collected in 2012 and 2013 (discussed at 1:30pm today).
• Understand the current status of the site.
13 V1; 12/20/15
Analytical chemistry for sediments and sheens
• Samples were analyzed by Alpha Analytical (Mansfield, MA) for Taylor Energy and the USCG Marine Safety Laboratory (New London, CT).
• Alpha Analytical measured over 100 distinct compounds that were used for gauging levels of contamination and calculating diagnostic ratios.
• The Marine Safety Laboratory performed an ASTM method for determining if sediments were a match or common source to sheens.
14 V1; 12/20/15
15 V1; 12/20/15
Forensics • Forensics of oil spills is generally based on
comparing the “chemical-like genetic markers” or “signatures” present in oil.
• There are numerous approaches that can be particularly powerful, but it becomes increasingly harder to get “perfect matches” as spilled oil gets older (weathers).
• For the sediment data, one diagnostic ratio recommended by Professor Ed Overton (LSU) in the literature will be employed.
16 V1; 12/20/15
17
Sour
reservoir
� Once released
OIL MIXTURE OF PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS
V1; 12/20/15
Initial summary of results • Petroleum hydrocarbons were detected in
every discrete sediment sample. • Contamination varied horizontally and
vertically in the sampling area with moderately degraded crude oil.
• Using one diagnostic ratio recommended by LSU scientists in previous scientific studies, the sediment can be binned into two types (background and former wellbay and Dome C).
18 V1; 12/20/15
2007 sampling TPHs values ‘grab’
S2=190 mg/kg
S5=47 mg/kg
S8=400 mg/kg
S3=210 mg/kg
S1= 98mg/kg
V1; 12/20/15
19
20
10
7
4 3
2
1 5
6
11
8 9
12
former well bay
50 0 50 100 150 Feet
toppled jacket
containment system
Sediment coring Locations
(July 2012*
and Feb 2013*** )
*Sediment was collected at all 12 numbered sites with both box and piston corers. locations= **Divers collected four cores along each side of the containment system only in February 2013. locations=
dome C (four cores
collected by diver)
Note: The July 2012 piston cores were originally designated as “DC-x” for drop core. They are now “PC-x” so that the Feb 2013 diver cores’s can be “DC-x”.
V1; 12/20/15
July 2012 sediment sampling -12 locations
-Each location included ~10 samples
V1; 12/20/15 21
Sediment samplers used in July 2012
22
Collected sediment down to ~5 meters but did not recover near surface sediment (also called drop cores)
Collected sediment in the surface layer, which in turn allows for a complete sediment record when married with the piston core. (Figure from USGS)
V1; 12/20/15
February 2013 sediment sampling (diver)
-4 locations -Each location included ~4 samples
V1; 12/20/15
23
Blow-up of cores collected in February 2013 (DC-1 to 4)
24
Dome C
Collected by diver. Each core split into four horizons one-ft thick
DC-1
DC-4
DC-2
DC-3
diver core=DC
10.5’
V1; 12/20/15
Figures for total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPHs) from the piston cores (or drop cores)
collected in July 2013
Twelve cores collected to mud depths of ~5m, split at 0.5 m intervals and analyzed
V1; 12/20/15 25
V1; 12/20/15
26
V1; 12/20/15
27
V1; 12/20/15
28
V1; 12/20/15
29
V1; 12/20/15
30
V1; 12/20/15
31
V1; 12/20/15
32
V1; 12/20/15
33
V1; 12/20/15
34
V1; 12/20/15
35
V1; 12/20/15
36
V1; 12/20/15
37
V1; 12/20/15 38
V1; 12/20/15 39
V1; 12/20/15 40
41
Norhopane (NH)
Hopane (H)
Diagnostic Ratio= NH/H
V1; 12/20/15
Lower sections for all 12 cores; NH/H = 0.64r0.06
NH/H = 0.62r0.02 NH/H = 0.46r0.04
V1; 12/20/15 42
V1; 12/20/15
43
10
7
4 3
2
1 5
6
11
8 9
12
former well bay
50 0 50 100 150 Feet
toppled jacket
containment system
Sediment coring Locations
(July 2012*
and Feb 2013*** )
*Sediment was collected at all 12 numbered sites with both box and piston corers. locations= **Divers collected four cores along each side of the containment system only in February 2013. locations=
dome C (four cores
collected by diver)
V1; 12/20/15
Note: The July 2012 piston cores were originally designated as “DC-x” for drop core. They are now “PC-x” so that the Feb 2013 diver cores’s can be “DC-x”.
V1; 12/20/15
Figures for TPHs from the diver core’s
collected in Feb 2013
Four cores collected to a mud depth of 4 feet, split at 1-ft intervals
V1; 12/20/15 44
45
V1; 12/20/15
46
V1; 12/20/15
47
V1; 12/20/15
48
V1; 12/20/15
49 All sixteen sections; NH/H = 0.48r0.01 V1; 12/20/15
50
1.00
10.00
100.00
1,000.00
10,000.00
100,000.00
1,000,000.00
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
1,7-12
2 to 6
Diver
Box
NH/H
Sedi
men
t TPH
(mg/
kg)
Former well bay and Dome C Background
v1; 12/20/15
51
10
7
4 3
2
1 5
6
11
8 9
12
former well bay
50 0 50 100 150 Feet
toppled jacket
containment system
Sediment coring Locations
(July 2012*
and Feb 2013*** )
*Sediment was collected at all 12 numbered sites with both box and piston corers. locations= **Divers collected four cores along each side of the containment system only in February 2013. locations=
dome C (four cores
collected by diver)
Note: The July 2012 piston cores were originally designated as “DC-x” for drop core. They are now “PC-x” so that the Feb 2013 diver cores’s can be “DC-x”.
V1; 12/20/15
52
Return to background; unlikely recharging at former well bay V1; 12/20/15
53
V1; 12/20/15
54
Cores ~25 meters from each other
V1; 12/20/15
Cores ~6 meters from each other
55
V1; 12/20/15
Summary on sediment data 1. Petroleum hydrocarbons detected in every
sediment sample. 2. There is a “background” level of petroleum
hydrocarbons around the MC20. 3. Two locations at MC20 have well-constrained
and high levels of petroleum hydrocarbons, linked to “former well bay and Dome C”.
4. No evidence for active recharge (no significant horizontally and laterally).
5. Could be potential for “secondary” sources of petroleum hydrocarbons to the environment (sheens).
56
V1; 12/20/15
