assessing unconventional hse risks in the arctic abstract · assessing unconventional hse risks in...

Assessing Unconventional HSE risks in the Arctic Abstract Philippe Blanc1, Annie Audibert-Hayet2

1TOTAL E&P, CSTJF – 64018 Pau, France 2TOTAL E&P, Tour Newton – 92400 Paris La Défense, France The Arctic is known to exhibit harsh environmental conditions for people living or working in this area. One of the responsibilities for companies operating in this perimeter is to ensure that all risks have been correctly assessed, and that prevention and protection measures have been adopted to reduce these risks at an “acceptable” level, for the environment, the populations, and the workforce. This is in particular the case for occupational health and safety risks. Risks usually discussed for workers in the Arctic are: extreme low temperatures and wind chill, slips, trips and falls, polar lows, icing and snow falls, and darkness in winter time. However, very little is known about possible exposure to other kinds of risks which appear to be specific to the Arctic. Such risks, called in this study “unconventional health and safety risks”, have been analysed and classified into two main groups: anthropogenic and natural risks. The former are mostly related to long-range transport of contaminants such as persistent organic pollutants and heavy metals, anthropogenic radioactivity and tropospheric ozone. Natural risks cover a rather wide range of topics such as: geomagnetic storms, electrostatic fields, UV radiations / albedo, naturally occurring radon, atmospheric pressure and oxygen content, biological or circadian cycles’ perturbations and gas hydrates occurrence. This paper shows some preliminary risk evaluation results, based on literature data recovery and analysis. Geographical information system has been used to map some of the contaminants occurrence from measurements in various substrates (atmosphere, soils, rivers, marine, fauna, flora, humans), with regards to likelihood of possible impact for operational sites. Consequences are analysed in terms of environmental pollution and human health impact. Some safety issues as well as possible impact of climate change for some of the risks treated are also discussed. For each of the potential risks analysed, some mitigation measures tracks for further operational or medical recommendations are proposed. The latter could also lead to possible recommendations at the international level, either in terms of environmental monitoring or human health exposure regulation. Current limitations of the study and gaps to be filled are also discussed. In particular, updated and additional data as well as contaminants transport modelling are necessary to move forward on the subject.

ARCTIC FRONTIERS 2014 #0056 - ASSESSING UNCONVENTIONAL HSE RISKS IN THE ARCTIC

Arctic Frontiers – Humans in the Arctic – Tromsø – January 2014 – P. Blanc – Total E&P - Assessing Unconventional HSE Risks in the Arctic

Philippe Blanc and Annie Audibert-Hayet, Total Exploration & Production, France

ARCTIC OUTDOOR WORKING CONDITIONS

E&P sites Lowest T (°C)

Wind (m/s)

Snøhvit - 18 Mean : 7

Kashagan - 40 24

Kharyaga - 53 Mean : 5

Max : 38 Shtokman - 40 28 Yamal - 57 Max : 32 Termokarst - 55 -

Russian regulation

Kharyaga winter 2009-2010


OGP report n°398

Wind-chill Chart

Extreme and changing conditions during the year : operate efficiently and safely is a challenge

Hazard identification & Risk assessment

Titre de la Présentation – Lieu et Pays – Date Jour Mois Année 3

« Risk » is a combination of probability of occurrence of an undesired event, or exposure to adverse conditions, and severity of the consequences (domains: human, environment, material & production / asset)

RISK ASSESSMENT

Technological Risk Matrix

Occupational Risk Matrix

R = P x S

Severity of consequences

Prob

abili

ty o

f occ

urre

nce

(TOTAL, CR EP HSE 041)

Stakes: identify and reduce HSE risks (human, environment, material) RISK LEVEL IN THE ARCTIC

Probability of occurrence

5

4

3

2

1


Common assumption: In the Arctic the severity of consequences drives risks

Arctic

Arctic

Risk Reduction must take place in priority through prevention

1 2 3 4 5

4

Standard context


(OGP, ACTF)

Stakes: identify and reduce HSE risks (human, environment, material) RISK LEVEL IN THE ARCTIC

Probability of occurrence

5

4

3

2

1


Our vision: in the Arctic the severity of consequences and probability of occurrence are both higher (additional hazards)

Arctic

Standard context

Arctic

Risk Reduction should also consider specific Arctic stressors

1 2 3 4 5

5 Arctic Frontiers – Humans in the Arctic – Tromsø – January 2014 – P. Blanc – Total E&P - Assessing Unconventional HSE Risks in the Arctic

(modified from OGP, ACTF)

UNCONVENTIONAL ARCTIC HEALTH & SAFETY RISKS

1. Anthropogenic risks (Arctic-related contaminants): a) Radioactivity b) Persistent Organic Pollutants (aka POPs) c) Heavy metals (Hg, Pb, Cd, Ni) d) Tropospheric ozone

2. Natural risks a) Radon / NORM b) Geomagnetic storms c) UV / Albedo d) Psycho & Biological perturbations / Circadian cycles e) Static electricity f) Atmospheric pressure / [O2] variations

6 Arctic Frontiers – Humans in the Arctic – Tromsø – January 2014 – P. Blanc – Total E&P - Assessing Unconventional HSE Risks in the Arctic

(AMAP, Arctic Pollution 2009)

(AMAP, 2009)

(AMAP, Arctic Pollution 2009)

(BarentsObserver, 2012)

7

Why focus on Arctic area? Because pollutants are concentrated in the Arctic • Long-range air transport of contaminants (e.g. POPs) with predominant

wind flows to the Arctic area

• Prevailing ocean currents go into the Arctic Ocean which acts as an almost closed water system ( concentration)

• Numerous anthropogenic radioactivity sources in Russia

• Large Russian rivers drain pollutants into Arctic Ocean

• Ice and permafrost having a role of trap and release (thawing)

ANTHROPOGENIC POLLUTANTS

Why worry for human health? • Studies show many indigenous population

in Arctic regions have poorer health level than national averages

• Affinity of contaminants towards fats

• Some contaminants are strongly likely to enter the food chain up to man consumption

• They have a bioaccumulation effect and are toxic to humans

• Some contaminants affect health of people at lower levels of exposure than previously thought


(source AMAP)

(Johannessen et al., Springer, 2010)

• Data collected have various origins:

– Sediments, soils, air, water – Fauna, flora, humans

• In particular:

8

Humans 592

Fauna 295

Flora 175

ANTHROPOGENIC POLLUTANTS: POPS AND HEAVY METALS

Literature review to collect POPs & heavy metals measurements data

Total amount of 1062 measurement spots

1991 2009 TIME SCALE

Data collected, analysed, and processed in GIS for mapping


9

Total amount of 1079 measurement spots

Atmospheric discharges

235

Wastes 70

Water Contamination

474 Sediments 105

Soils 126

Birds 19

Fishes 4

Algae 4

Seals 32

Ice melting

6

Rain falls 4

1994 2010 TIME SCALE

ANTHROPOGENIC POLLUTANTS: RADIOACTIVITY

Literature review to collect radionuclides measurements data


Data collected, analysed, and processed in GIS for mapping (main radionuclides concerned: 137Cs, 90Sr, 239Pu, 131I, 3H)

ANTHROPOGENIC POLLUTANTS OCCURRENCE MAPPING

10

Raw data cartography

Examples : anthropogenic radioactivity contamination


137Cs (Bq/m3)

Extrapolated statistical

distributions (ArcGIS)

90Sr (Bq/m3)

137Cs (Bq/Yr)

Atmospheric releases

Water

Water

137Cs (Bq/Kg)

Sediments

Limitations for risk assessment - Data availability and representativity - Data update - Mathematical extrapolations Transport modeling to be considered - Contamination modes and health effect modeling

11

• Alert level at 10 µg/kg

HCB µg/kg Humans

Examples : POPs and Heavy metals

Extrapolated statistical

distributions (ArcGIS)


ANTHROPOGENIC POLLUTANTS OCCURRENCE MAPPING

PCB µg/kg Humans

•Alert level at 5 µg/kg for pregnant women and children •Alert level at 20 µg/kg for general population •Action level at 100 µg/kg

DDE µg/kg Humans

•Alert level at 100 µg/kg •Action level at 200 µg/kg

•Safety food threshold at 0.1 mg/kg in mammals

Hg mg/kg Fauna

Limitations for risk assessment - Data availability and representativity - Data update - Mathematical extrapolations Transport modeling to be considered - Contamination modes and health effect modeling

12

ANTHROPOGENIC POLLUTANTS


Example of spider diagram for 1st level risk evaluation for operational sites: Anthropogenic Radioactivity

3H (Bq/m3) in water

90Sr Values >>> Average concentrations in global Russian rivers (5-6 Bq/m3), in

particular for one site (B) 3H Concentrations are equivalent to those of global Russian rivers (2000 Bq/m3 à 3000 Bq/m3) except for 2 sites (A and B)

Possible explanation Presence of nuclear facilities upstream: Mayak PA Siberian Chemical Combine

Specific attention should be paid for quantitative risk assessment in particular for sites A and B

90Sr (Bq/m3) in water A

B

C D

E

A

B

C D

E

(AMAP Assessment 2009)

Sites

Sites

Exposure to abnormal magnetic fields • Arctic regions at high latitudes are likely to be under the influence of more pronounced

abnormal geomagnetic storms, boreal aurora, due to solar activity causing changes in Earth’s magnetosphere

• Abnormal geomagnetic fields are known to entail telecommunication perturbations

• Some studies have shown that some people are predisposed to adverse health due to geomagnetic activity (“Aurora Disturbance Sensitive People “ )

• Geomagnetic storms are likely to provoke disturbance of nervous and cardiovascular systems in the human body

13

ABNORMAL GEOMAGNETIC PERTURBATIONS

Monitoring / Risk mitigation • Forecast and follow-up of solar activity and polar aurora is possible by using dedicated

database websites

• Perturbations of the geomagnetic fields can be traced with the use of dedicated activity indices

• Forecast & monitoring of occurrence and intensity of geomagnetic storms make it possible to take actions to minimize operational activity which could possibly lead to faintness and accident

• Fitness to work and medical monitoring should consider adapted nervous and cardiovascular examination and sensitivity towards magnetic fields exposure

Abnormal geomagnetic perturbations in the High North are also the cause of greater

pipelines corrosion (Geomagnetically Induced

Currents)

Increased risks of loss of containment / oil spills if not considered and mitigated

Cardio-vascular activity as a function of geomagnetic activity (Otsuka K. et al., 2001)


Aurora from Iceland on March 8, 2012

14

• Modeling from important referenced accidents • Probability of incident during a 1-hour polar lights • Increase of probability by a factor 10 to 20 within the highest risk zone

Occurrence probability map for geomagnetic risk (after Molinski T. , 1996)

Example of geomagnetic storm in April 2000 (Central Technology, Inc. 2011.)

ABNORMAL GEOMAGNETIC PERTURBATIONS

Main current Total E&P Arctic operational sites of interest are within

the area of highest geomagnetic storm occurrence and risk

Deserves specific attention for risk evaluation (technical, human)


15

OPERATIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS


Objective: Risk reduction (probability of occurrence or/and severity of consequences)

Preventive measures Mitigation measures

Measures can be taken at different steps and levels of site cycle life : design / engineering, technical,

operational, management, procedures, medical, …

At this stage of the study on unconventional Arctic H&S risks, most recommendations tracks mainly concern preventive measures, such as: Adapted fitness to work procedures / detection Implement adapted medical monitoring taking specific unconventional health risks into account Implement processes for natural risks forecast and monitoring (stations, internet, …) Implement individual portative detectors for instantaneous exposure level estimation Develop adapted environmental monitoring processes Integrate specific contaminants in EIA / EBS Develop adapted catering / food policy Develop workforce and management awareness towards specific Arctic risks exposure Ensure correct ventilation of enclosed areas Etc.

Recommendations have to be provided to help implementation of measures at project and site levels

(TOTAL, CR EP HSE 041)

16

Besides typical known hazards, the Arctic displays other specific stressors that may impact health and safety of workers; such hazards deserve to be identified and studied for risk prevention and mitigation:

• Different potential “unconventional” hazards (anthropogenic and natural) studied through literature survey (occurrence, measurements data, regulation, health impact)

• Preliminary risk evaluation performed, but progress level different depending on hazards considered

• GIS used to map anthropogenic contaminants occurrence vs. Total E&P operational sites of interest in the Arctic

• For each potential hazard, possible solutions for risk reduction investigated (monitoring, prevention, protection, mitigation) for future operational recommendations

• Some recommendations already shared with operational and medical staff

• Arctic-related contaminants should be considered in EIA / EBS

• Additional work to be performed for quantitative risk assessment and ranking: data / measurements update, contaminants transport modelling, health threshold levels / local regulations, health studies, health/illness & safety statistical data, …

SYNTHESIS / CONCLUSION


THANK YOU !


The TOTAL GROUP is defined as TOTAL S.A. and its affiliates and shall include the person and the entity making the presentation.

Disclaimer This presentation may include forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 with respect to the financial condition, results of operations, business, strategy and plans of TOTAL GROUP that are subject to risk factors and uncertainties caused by changes in, without limitation, technological development and innovation, supply sources, legal framework, market conditions, political or economic events. TOTAL GROUP does not assume any obligation to update publicly any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. Further information on factors which could affect the company’s financial results is provided in documents filed by TOTAL GROUP with the French Autorité des Marchés Financiers and the US Securities and Exchange Commission. Accordingly, no reliance may be placed on the accuracy or correctness of any such statements.

Copyright All rights are reserved and all material in this presentation may not be reproduced without the express written permission of the TOTAL GROUP.

DISCLAIMER AND COPYRIGHT RESERVATION


assessing unconventional hse risks in the arctic abstract · assessing unconventional hse risks in...

Documents