Characteristics of South Arne Oil

South Arne Field Development: AnEnvironmental Impact Assessment of OilSpillsMALCOLM FITZPATRICK , ROSS WARRENà* & NARVE EKROL§ Amerada Hess A/S, éstergade 26 B, 1100 Copenhagen K, DenmarkàCOWI Consulting Engineers and Planners AS, Parallelvej 15, 2800 Lyngby, Denmark§Sintef, S.P. Andersens vei 15 B, 7465 Trondheim, Norway

The South Arne ®eld being developed by Amerada Hess A/S is located in 60 m water depth approximately200 km from the Danish mainland, in block 5604/29 of the Danish sector of the North Sea.

As part of the development of the ®eld, a comprehensive environmental impact assessment has beencarried out, including the assessment of the impact from oil spills. The Danish authorities required that aÔworst caseÕ oil spill be chosen as the basis for the assessment on birds and aquatic organisms includingplankton, ®sh eggs and larvae and benthos.

A well blow-out at the surface was chosen as the worst case for the impact on birds, and a seabed blow-out for aquatic organisms.

The oil spill modelling was carried out with the DEEPBLOW, SLIKMAP and OSCAR models fromSINTEF. The modelling identi®ed environmentally sensitive areas which could potentially be in¯uenced byan oil spill. These included the Dogger Bank, western Skagerrak, south-western Norwegian Trench, theeastern German Bight and the Wadden Sea.

Historical meteorological and hydrodynamic scenarios were chosen from a long period of records toensure that the plume passed through the environmentally sensitive resource areas.

For birds, a scan of the literature and available databases was made to determine the numbers andspecies of birds in the areas swept by the surface slick, the number of fatalities was estimated and ®nally therecovery time for each species population was estimated.

The impact on aquatic organisms was estimated using the predicted environmental concentration/pre-dicted no e�ect concentration (PEC/PNEC) method of the CHARM model. This method is normallyapplied to continuous discharges, but here has been used to estimate the impact of a transient pollutioncloud resulting from an oil spill. Ó 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: South Arne, oil spill modelling, EIA, seabirds, aquatic organisms, sediment

Introduction

The South Arne ®eld being developed by AmeradaHess A/S is located in 60 m water depth approximately200 km from the Danish mainland, in block 5604/29 ofthe Danish sector of the North Sea; see Fig. 1. Aconcept involving the use of a gravity base (GBS)

platform with oil storage was selected. Figure 2 showsthe ®nal design.

As part of the requirements for obtaining ®eld de-velopment approval, a comprehensive environmentalimpact assessment (EIA) was carried out. Amongother things, the Danish authorities required a de-scription and sensitivity assessment of

· the potential detrimental impact of oil,· the most vulnerable bird species and their seasonal

variation,· the occurrence and vulnerability of ®sh larvae and

plankton concentrations, and

133

Spill Science & Technology Bulletin, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 133±143, 2000

Ó 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Printed in Great Britain

1353-2561/00 $ - see front matter

PII: S1353-2561(00)00045-1

*Corresponding author. Tel.: +45-45-972211; fax: +45-45-972212.

· the occurrence and vulnerability of fauna and ¯oraon and in the seabed.

This paper presents a brief review of the methodologyapplied in the EIA and a summary of the most im-portant results.

Methodology, Approach and Results

The assessment of the impact of an oil spill involvesa logical series of tasks. The methodology and ap-proach for each of these tasks are brie¯y describedbelow.

Fig. 2 Final design of the South Arne o�shore facility.

Fig. 1 Location of the South Arne ®eld.

M. FITZPATRICK et al.

134 Spill Science & Technology Bulletin 6(2)

Choice of oil spill scenario

A basic requirement of the Danish authorities wasthat the oil spill scenario should be a Ôworst caseÕ, ir-respective of its probability. However, a probabilityanalysis was carried out as part of the justi®cation ofthe ®nal choice. Consideration was given to using oneof the following:

· a well blow-out,· an export tanker incident, and· leakage from the platform oil storage system.

A traditional probability analysis based on availabledata revealed the following.

· Tanker transport of crude is an accepted practice inthe North Sea and through the Danish sector. Atanker incident has a very low probability at2:6� 10ÿ5 per year.

· A well blow-out using North Sea practices and tech-nology has a very low probability, at 5� 10ÿ4 peryear or less. This reduces to 5� 10ÿ5 per year or lesswhen the relative productivity of the di�erent areasof the reservoir is considered.

· An oil spill from damage to the GBS due to adropped object is considered to have a probabilityof 2:73� 10ÿ4 per year.

· Due to exit velocities, a well blow-out can be expect-ed to give a faster rate of mixing and spread than atanker or GBS incident.

· Due to the pressures and rate of release involved, awell blow-out would present more di�culties forcontrolling than a tanker and GBS incident.

On the basis of the above, whilst not having thehighest probability, a well blow-out was considered topresent the greatest potential environmental impact.

The DEEPBLOW model (Johansen, 1998; Fannelùp& Sjùen, 1980) was used to simulate the physical pro-cesses in the rising plume of oil and gas from a blow-out at the seabed. The gas/oil ratio of 1400:1 and anexit pressure of 360 bar would give a high outlet ve-locity of 118 m/s for the oil/gas mixture at the seabed.The model simulations showed that this high velocitywould disperse the oil into very small droplets with95% less than 100 microns in diameter. Such dropletsremain permanently dispersed in the water column andonly an insigni®cant sheen will form on the surface. Onthis basis it was chosen to use a seabed blow-out as theworst case for aquatic organisms since it gave themaximum concentrations of oil in the water columnand a surface blow-out as the worst case for birds.

De®nition of the in¯uence area

The in¯uence area is, statistically, the area likely tobe a�ected by an oil spill. For the surface blow-out it

was determined through the use of the SLIKMAPmodel (Johansen & Skognes, 1994) which simulatesthe drift, spreading and weathering of oil on the seasurface. It is designed for use in a statistical mode sothat it simulates oil spills under a large number ofmeteorological situations selected at random within aspeci®ed time frame. A total of 1200 simulations se-lected from a 27-year period of meteorological recordswas made. The objective is to produce long-term sta-tistics on the in¯uence area, the probability of oilreaching all locations within the in¯uence area, the oilarrival times at each location including the coastline,the oil thickness at each location and the amount of oilstranded on adjacent coasts. The in¯uence area isde®ned as the area inside the 5% probability isoline,with an example shown in Fig. 3.

Similarly, the in¯uence area for the seabed blow-outwas determined with the OSCAR model (Reed et al.,1995, Aamo et al., 1993) which simulates the spreadingand weathering of oil on the surface and in the watercolumn in 3D. It also records the amount of oilreaching shorelines and being deposited in the sedi-ments. The OSCAR model simulates the physical,chemical and biological processes connected with anoil spill:

· drift and spreading at the surface due to wind andcurrents,

· transport and di�usion in the water column due tothe 3D current pattern,

Fig. 3 Probability (%) of arrival of oil from a surface blow-outduring summer (April±September).

SOUTH ARNE FIELD DEVELOPMENT: AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

Spill Science & Technology Bulletin 6(2) 135

· evaporation,· water-in-oil emulsi®cation,· oil-in-water dispersion,· dissolution,· biodegradation,· sedimentation,· uptake of oil by seabed sediments,· stranding, and· response action.

A total of 40 summer meteorological situations and 50winter situations was selected from the period 1990±94since 3D current data for the North Sea were availablefor only those ®ve years.

An unexpected result is that, during all ®ve sum-mers, the oil only spreads locally around the SouthArne site and is not transported large distances aroundthe North Sea. This is attributed to the light and

varying weather conditions during the summer. Simi-larly, during winter there is a marked consistency inthe results. In all ®ve winter seasons, the oil spreads ina north-easterly direction due to the residual currentpattern generated by the predominant strong westerlyand south-westerly winds. The oil also spreads locallyaround the site. Examples of the results are shown inFig. 4.

Occurrence of organisms in the sensitive resource areas

The North Sea and adjacent waters are importantareas for a number of species of seabirds. Data aboutthese birds were collected through a literature searchand from publicly available databases. The basis forthe selection of representative species was their num-bers, particularly their proportion of the world pop-

Fig. 4 Maximum concentrations of THC in the water column for 8 seabed blow-outs in summer 1990 (top) and winter 1990±91 (bottom).



ulation and their sensitivity to oil. Two groups ofseabirds were considered:

· birds which are on the water surface for a large pro-portion of the time, and

· birds which are in the air for most of the time.

In addition, data on the seasonal variation of both thenumbers of birds and their sensitivity were collectedand included in the impact assessment.

The aquatic organisms selected to be most repre-sentative of the area are the characteristic groups ofplankton:

· phytoplankton (algae or plant plankton),· holoplankton (especially crustaceans ± copepods),· meroplankton (larvae plankton excluding ®sh lar-

vae), and· ®sh eggs and larvae.

Data on the occurrence of these organisms were alsofound in literature and various databases.

Finally, the occurrence of benthic fauna in the areawas investigated and mapped. No stone reefs, cold seacoral reefs or similar habitats for subsea ¯ora wereidenti®ed and were therefore not assessed.

As with the seabirds, the seasonal variation of thepelagic and benthic organisms, both their occurrenceand life cycle, was determined.

Table 1 shows the sensitive resource areas whichwere identi®ed and the organisms considered in theimpact assessment.

Characteristics of South Arne oil

The South Arne crude oil was analysed using gaschromatography/mass spectrometry for 34 target vol-atile analytes in the C5 to C10 area and 50 semi-vola-

tiles above C10. The results showed that the oil is wax-rich with a relatively high pour point and is classi®edas a para�nic crude oil. The asphaltene content isrelatively high (ÔhardÕ 0.22%) compared to many otherNorth Sea crude oils but contains a high proportion oflight components, which results in a relatively highevaporation. Due to the high evaporative loss therewill be a concentration of heavier components in theoil on the sea surface. This will lead to increasingdensity and pour point.

Total hydrocarbon (THC), water accommodatedfraction (WAF), decane, naphthalene and ben-zo(a)pyrene (BaP) were chosen as representatives ofthe toxic components in the oil and used in the impactassessment. Decane (6.1 g/kg) is representative of thetoxicity of alkanes, naphthalene (0.7 g/kg) of acutetoxic e�ects and BaP (2 mg/kg) for chronic toxic e�ects.

Sensitivity of organisms to oil and oil components

Evaluation of the vulnerability of aquatic organismswas based on an assessment of the toxicity of the crudeoil, of WAF and of the selected single components forphytoplankton, zooplankton, ®sh and ®sh larvae andzoobenthos. Data on local species as well as standardtest organisms were collected.

The oil spill model cannot handle all the singlecomponents, but two key fractions in toxicity assess-ment were modelled, namely THC and WAF.

The method of quanti®cation of the e�ects onaquatic organisms was based on guidelines used in theEU, USA and in the OECD countries. The principlesare also integrated in the North Sea countriesCHARM model, that calculates predicted environ-mental concentration/predicted no-e�ect concentra-tion (PEC/PNEC).

Table 1 Sensitive resource areas and organisms

Sensitive area Organisms Sensitive seasons and species

Western Skagerrak and south-westernNorwegian Trench

Birds July±August: fulmar, great skua, kittiwake; November±February:gannet, razorbill, little auk, guillemot, herring gull

Fish eggs and larvae February±March: cod egg and larvae, herring larvae; April±June:cod larvae

Dogger Bank Birds August±October: guillemotFish eggs and larvae June±September: spratt; November±April: herring larvae, cod

egg and larvaeMeroplankton April±June: echinoderms, polychaetes, bivalves

Zoobenthos No pronounced seasonality

Central North Sea Fish eggs and larvae June: cod larvae, whiting and sprat eggs; December±January:cod and plaice egg

Plankton August±September: phytoplankton; March±April: phytoplankton,meroplankton, zooplankton

Wadden Sea and eastern German Bight Birds April±May: waders, terns; July: gulls, terns; August±September:waders, terns; October: geese, ducks



PEC was calculated by the OSCAR model, whilethe PNEC was estimated from ecotoxicological datafor each component considered. E�ect concentrationsare multiplied with accepted safety factors (dependingof the amount of available data) to obtain PNEC, andthe result is a Ôsafety levelÕ that applies to the wholeecosystem and is also valid for long-term e�ects of thecomponent.

Choice of meteorological and hydrodynamic scenarios

A number of worst case meteorological and hy-drodynamic scenarios were required for the oil spillsimulations. In this context, worst case means thetransport to the previously identi®ed sensitive resourceareas of

· the largest quantity of oil at the surface, and· the highest concentrations of oil and oil components

in the water column.

It is emphasised that historical scenarios were chosenin order to ensure that the simulations were realisticworst cases.

The meteorological scenarios for the surface blow-out were chosen from the same scenarios simulated inthe SLIKMAP model to de®ne the in¯uence area.1200 scenarios selected at random from the 24-yearperiod 1967±91 form the basis for the choice of theworst cases for each sensitive resource area.

The scenarios for the seabed blow-out were chosenfrom the ®ve-year period 1990±94. This is the periodfor which hindcasted 3D ¯ow patterns in the NorthSea were available. First the worst summer and winterseasons were identi®ed for each of the sensitive re-source areas, and then the worst case scenarios werechosen from those seasons.

The scenarios were ®nally chosen to correspondwith the most sensitive seasons for each organism asshown in Table 1.

Oil spill modelling of the chosen scenarios

The OSCAR model was used to simulate the driftand fate of oil from both the surface and seabed blow-outs. The following output was obtained for the sur-face blow-out simulations and provided the basis forthe impact assessment:

· surface oil densities in tonnes/km2 and stranded oilat 1, 2, 3, 7, 14, 21 and 28 days,

· maximum oil thickness at each location duringentire run,

· maximum concentrations of THC and WAF in thewater column at each location during the entire run,and

· time series of mass balance, area coverage and oil insensitive resource areas.

A selection of plots for a scenario involving the Nor-wegian Trench is reproduced in Fig. 5.

The following output was obtained from the OS-CAR model for each of the seabed blow-out simula-tions:

· 2D plan plot of instantaneous maximum concentra-tions in the water column at ®ve-day intervals ofTHC, WAF, decane, napthalene and BaP,

· 2D plan plot of maximum concentrations in the wa-ter column at each location during the entire run,

· 2D plan plot of maximum concentrations in the sed-iment at each location during the entire run, and

· 2D vertical section plot of instantaneous concentra-tions along the centre line of the plume togetherwith the corresponding plan plot.

A selection of plots for a scenario involving Skagerrakand the Norwegian Trench is reproduced in Fig. 6.

Assessment of impact on birds

The procedure for assessing the impact of an oil spillon birds consisted of the following steps.

· Determine the occurrence of sea birds and shorebirds in the area including their species and numbersat each season of the year.

· Determine the area swept by the surface plume foreach oil spill incident on the basis of the model sim-ulations.

· Estimate the bird mortalities on the basis of a super-position of the maps of occurrence of birds and thearea swept by the oil.

· Estimate the recovery time for each bird species.

A summary picture of the occurrence of sea birds inthe North Sea area is shown in Fig. 7. It is based onthe European seabirds at sea (ESAS) database.

Sea birds and shore birds are extremely vulnerableto oil with damage occurring by:

· direct contact resulting in a reduction or destructionof the water repellent and heat insulating propertiesof their plumage,

· ingestion of oil contaminated food items,· ingestion of oil when cleaning contaminated feath-

ers, and· damage to hormone regulation and thereby their

reproduction capability.

The damage to the water repellent and insulationproperties of the plumage is the most common causeof death. At present there is no established basis forestimating the mortality of birds in an area a�ected bya spill. In the present study the extremely conservative



Fig.5

Are

al

den

sity

of

surf

ace

oil

for

asu

rface

blo

w-o

ut

com

men

cin

g13

Au

gu

st1970.



Fig.6

Maxim

um

TH

Cin

the

wate

rco

lum

nfo

ra

seab

edb

low

-ou

tco

mm

enci

ng

15

Jan

uary

1990.



Table 2 Sea bird mortality

Area Bird species Mortality Percent of biogeographical population

Skagerrak and Norwegian Trench, latesummer

Fulmar 190,000 1.3Gannet 4300 0.9

Great skua 2400 8.6Lesser black-backed gull 6000 0.9

Guillemot 183,000 4.6

Skagerrak and Norwegian Trench, win-ter

Herring gull 75,000 2.8Greater black-backed gull 11,800 2.5

Kittiwake 170,000 2.0Guillemot 150,000 3.8Razorbill 40,000 4.0Little auk 150,000 5.5

Dogger Bank, late summer/autumn Fulmar 85,000 0.5Gannet 2800 0.6

Great skua 250 0.9Lesser black-backed gull 350 0.1

Guillemot 42,000 1.0

Dogger Bank, winter Common gull 4000 0.2Lesser black-backed gull 4000 0.6

Herring gull 6000 0.2Greater black-backed gull 2700 0.6

Kittiwake 78,000 0.9Guillemot 57,000 1.4Razorbill 5400 0.5Little auk 31,000 1.1

Eastern German Bight, spring Divers 12,800 11.6Common scoter 27,000 2.1Common gull 44,000 2.8

Fig. 7 Sea bird areas of international importance in the North Sea (Skov et al. (1995), with permission from Bird Life International).



assumption was made that all birds in the area sweptby oil would be killed. The results of this worst caseimpact for species in each of the sensitive areas areshown in Table 2.

The potential population recovery for the sea birdsdepends on their regeneration capacities and strategiesof the individual species. Yearly growth rates for thespecies in Table 2 are estimated to 2% for divers,fulmar and gannet, 5% for great skua, kittiwake,guillemot, razorbill and little auk, 10% for all the gullsand 20% for the common scoter. These rates givepopulation recovery times of 1±2 years for all speciesexcept divers where 6±7 years is estimated.

It was not possible to make a similar detailedanalysis of the possible mortality of the shore birds inthe Wadden Sea. However, the species identi®ed asbeing subject to a relatively high risk of being exposedto drifting and stranded oil were the bar-tailed godwit,oystercatcher, sanderling, shelduck, light-bellied brentgoose and eider. Based on information about theyearly growth rates and general experience in the area,it is estimated that the recovery of the populationshere will also occur within 1±2 years.

A recent study by Swansea University has shownthat the common scoter population a�ected by the SeaEmpress oil spill in Milford Haven in February 1996has made a remarkable recovery. From a mortality of4000 representing 35%, the population has increasedfrom 4000 in 1997, 7000 in 1998 to the present level of17,000.

Assessment of impact on plankton organisms

The impact of an oil spill on plankton organismswas based on the abundance and vulnerability of im-portant plankton organisms. The assessment of theabundance was based on published data on seasonalvariation and long-term trends in density and speciesdistribution, as well as on the seasonal occurrence ofsensitive stages of their life cycle. Vulnerability wasmeasured as the toxicity of single components and ofcrude oil for phytoplankton and holo- and mero-zooplankton, and for standard test organisms.

Phytoplankton, holo- and mero-zooplankton havein general the highest abundance in the southernNorth Sea and in the Dogger Bank area. Phyto-plankton bloom in spring and to a lesser extent inearly autumn and have minimum abundance duringwinter. Being the main food source, the seasonalpattern of phytoplankton production is re¯ected alsoin zooplankton occurrence.

Quanti®cation of the e�ects on plankton organismswas based on calculation of PEC/PNEC. PEC is cal-culated by the oil spill model, while the calculation ofPNEC is based on the same principles as in the

CHARM model. This represents a new application ofthe PEC/PNEC method since it is normally used forestimating the impact of persistent pollutant concen-trations, while in this case the pollutant occurrence istransient, i.e., the oil plume passes through an area ina relatively short time. The interpretation of WAF andthe concentration of THC in the water phase focusedthe impact assessment on the acutely toxic water-sol-uble compounds, and the heavy, often aromaticcompounds with chronic e�ects.

The concentrations of decane and BaP in the watercolumn were found to be so low that the risk of impactwas negligible. However, WAF and naphthalene willbe lethal for meroplankton in the vicinity of theplatform, but the e�ect is small compared to the largenatural variations which occur.

Assessment of impact on ®sh eggs and larvae

The impact of oil spills on ®sh, ®sh eggs and larvaeis a subject which has not yet been well researched.Some data are available in the literature for cod eggsand larvae, but little for other species. In is also gen-erally accepted that concentrations of oil componentsin an oil spill which are toxic to adult ®sh are usuallynot encountered, although tainting may occur, and the®sh will show avoidance behaviour.

The impact assessment focused on cod eggs andlarvae because they are found in considerable con-centrations close to South Arne. The Dogger Bankarea is an important spawning area for cod in winter/spring, and the larvae pass the South Arne and otheroil ®elds on their way to their northern nursery areas.The impact on other species was made di�cult due tothe lack of conclusive data on their vulnerability.

The toxicity of crude oil for ®sh eggs and larvae isassumed to be due to the content of di- and triaro-matic hydrocarbons (i.e., mainly naphthalenes andmethylated naphthalenes) (K�uhnhold, 1977). Methy-lated naphthalenes seem more toxic than naphthalenes(Falk-Petersen et al., 1982; Stene & Lùnning, 1984a,b),but the concentration of methylated naphthalenes inWAF is usually less than that of naphthalenes(Jeppesen, 1996). E�ects of naphthalene have beenencountered for concentrations of 0.01 mg/l during14 days of exposure, whereas Stene and Lùnning,(1984a,b) did not ®nd any e�ect after exposure of codeggs to 3 mg/l during a short-time experiment (24hours). Solbakken et al. (1984) have shown in tracerexperiments that naphthalene taken up by cod eggsduring exposure is excreted almost completely within24 hours after the termination of the exposure.

The OSCAR modelling showed that the maximumarea in which there could be an impact was approxi-mately 20� 50 km. Cod spawn over a large geo-



graphical area and over a long period of time and anoil spill in¯uence area of the above estimated size isnot expected to have any measurable in¯uence on thecod population in the North Sea. Since other speciessuch as herring capelin, plaice and ¯ounder are esti-mated to be less sensitive than cod, no signi®cante�ects can be expected.

Assessment of impact on benthic organisms

Benthic organisms comprise both ¯ora and fauna.Only the fauna are of interest in the central North Seaand over Dogger Bank since the water is too deep ortoo turbid to allow su�cient penetration of light tosupport the growth of any vegetation. On the otherhand, the Wadden Sea, which is within the oil spill in-¯uence area, has abundant vegetation in the tidal zone.

Echinoderms, bivalves and polychaete wormsdominate the benthic organisms in the North Sea.Such zoobenthos are usually stationary, slow growingand often perennial organisms, with only little sea-sonal variation in biomass. In the area around SouthArne the zoobenthos community can be characterisedas a classical soft bottom ÔAmphiura communityÕ,named after the abundant brittle star. Other membersof the community are bristle worms, bivalves, mol-lusks, phornida and cnidaria. K�unitzer et al. (1992)found an average of 1093 individuals/m2 representing43 fauna species in the area with an average biomassof 7.6 g/m2.

Rice et al. (1977) found that zoobenthos were lesssensitive to the toxic e�ects of crude oil than ®sh eggsand larvae. Toxic limits were found to be 3±12 mg/ltotal aromatic hydrocarbon. The modelling showedconcentrations in the sediments around the platformto be a factor of 1000 below these suggested e�ectconcentrations, and it can be concluded that no sig-ni®cant e�ects on the zoobenthos can be foreseen,either on epifauna or on infauna.

When oil arrives in the Wadden Sea it has lost itsacute toxicity due to evaporation and dissolution ofthe most toxic components.

Adverse physical e�ects such as smothering is notassumed to have any signi®cant e�ect as any oil thatreached this point would appear as ®rm lumps and notas a ®lm. It also would not interfere directly with theeither benthic plants or invertebrate organisms livingin the sediment and the oil lumps are assumed to be asize that will not interfere with the ®ltering systems ofthe benthic ®ltrators.

Conclusions

The overall conclusion is that in the highly unlikelyevent of an oil spill from the South Arne ®eld, the

environmental damage caused by a worst case oil spillwould be of a temporary nature. Recovery will occurwithin a few days for plankton and 1±2 years for mostbirds due to their reproductivity rates. The recoverytimes for birds are most likely to be even shorter dueto the highly conservative estimates of fatalities toseabirds that have been assumed.

AcknowledgementsÐThe following persons were also involved inthis part of the EIA and their contribution is acknowledged.

References

Aamo, O.M., Reed, M., Daling, P.S., Johansen, é., 1993. Alaboratory-based weathering model: PC version for coupling totransport models. In: Proceedings of the 1993 Arctic and MarineOil Spill Program (AMOP) Technical Seminar, pp. 617±626.

Falk-Petersen, I.B., Sñthre, L.J., Lùnning, S., 1982. Toxic e�ects ofnaphthalene and methylnaphthalene on marine plankton organ-isms. Sarsia 67, 171±178.

Fannelùp, T.K., Sjùen, K., 1980. Hydrodynamics of underwaterblowouts. Norwegian Maritime Research 4, 17±33.

Jeppesen, J.P., 1996. Eksperimentelt studie af embryoner og larveraf Nordsùtorsk (Gadus morhua) Del A Respons overfor naph-thalen. Specialerapport. Laboratoriet for sammenlignende fysi-ologi August Krogh Instituttet. Kùbenhavns Universitet.

Johansen, é., 1998. Subsea blowout model for deep waters.SINTEF Applied Chemistry Draft Report, p. 32.

Johansen, é., Skognes, K., 1994. Statistical oil drift model forenvironmental risk assessments. OCN P-22890, December 1994.

K�uhnhold, W.W., 1977. The e�ect of mineral oils on the develop-ment of eggs and larvae of marine species. A review andcomparison of experimental data in regard to possible damage atsea. Rapports et Proces-Verbaux des R�eunions, Conseil Inter-national pour lÕExploration de la Mar 171, 175±183.

K�unitzer, A., Basford, D., Craeymeersch, J.A., Dewarumez, J.M.,D�orjes, J., Duineveld, G.C.A., Eleftheriou, A., Heip, C.,Herman, P., Kingston, P., Niermann, U., Rachor, E., Rumohr,H., de Wilde, P.A.J., 1992. The benthic infauna of the North Sea:species distribution and assemblages. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 49, 127±143.

Reed, M., French, D., Rines, H., Rye, H., 1995. A three-dimensional oil and chemical spill model for environmentalimpact assessment. In: Proceedings of the 1995 International OilSpill Conference, pp. 61±66.

Rice, S.D., Moles, A., Taylor, T.L., Karinen, J.F., 1977. Sensitivityof 39 Alaskan marine species to cook inlet crude oil and no. 2fuel oil. American Petroleum Institute, 549±554.

Skov, H., D�urinck, J., Leopold, M.F., Tasker, M.L., 1995.Important Birds Areas for seabirds in the North Sea. BirdLifeInternational, Cambridge.

Solbakken, J.E., Tilseth, S., Palmork, K.H., 1984. Uptake andelimination of aromatic hydrocarbons and chlorinated biphenylin eggs and larvae of cod (Gadus morhua). Marine BiologyProgress Series Vol. 16, 297±301.

Stene, A., Lùnning, S., 1984a. E�ects of 2-methylnaphthalene oneggs and larvae of six marine ®sh species. Sarsia 69, 199±203.

Stene, A., Lùnning, S., 1984b. E�ects of short-time exposure tonaphthalene, methyl and hydroxynapthalenes on two di�er-ent embryonic stages of cod (Gadus morhua). Sarsia 70, 279±285.

COWI Helle Vang Andersen, Frank Stuer-Lauridsen, OleGeertz-Hansen, Ste�en Brùgger-Jensen, Jacob Jensen

SINTEF Mark Reed, Per S. Daling, Kjell Skognes, éisteinJohansen

ORNIS Henrik Skov, Jan Durinck



Characteristics of South Arne Oil

Documents

Transcript of Characteristics of South Arne Oil