Oil and Gas Development: Mysteries and Misconceptions

Offshore drilling platform; flickr

Ever wonder why you see oil rigs off in the distance in certain areas but not others?  Those odd platforms sit unassumingly by day and eerily light up the horizon by night, reminding us that energy production never sleeps.  As much as we'd all love to use efficient light bulbs and drive hybrids, it is important to recognize that traditional energy sources, such as oil and gas, are still an integral aspect of our lives.  So, rather than bemoaning and demonizing it, I wanted to learn a little more about the industry in hopes of forming more educated and refined opinions rather than presumptive disdain.  For my efforts, I was rewarded with discovering a reassuring example of scientific data being used to directly inform management and development.

OCS lease sale areas with oil wells

Starting with the basics, it's important to remember that the new and improved Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) regulates and manages all aspects of traditional and renewable energy production in the marine environment.  As we know, creating energy from natural resources is no easy feat, giving BOEM enormous responsibility throughout the planning, exploration, development, and production phases.  Main concerns include safety, feasibility (profitability), and environmental stewardship, which are important factors that determine the outcome of where, when, and how energy is developed around the country, starting with the lease sale.   

Lease sales by sensitivity

Companies purchase areas of the ocean (seafloor) just as they would purchase the rights to develop on land.  In this case, Shell, for example, buys 5-year rights to sail around in specific areas of the arctic looking for features that might indicate plentiful oil deposits.  Once this scoping is finished, they can choose if and where to develop.  What I found interesting though, was the environmental sensitivity analysis that was conducted to improve stewardship and planning in the 2012-2017 lease sale process.  In this tedious document, they show how each lease sale area was numerically scored for sensitivity (to spills and acoustic or physical disturbance) in three categories: marine habitat, productivity, and marine fauna. 

Arctic drilling map

By attaching a number value to the type of seafloor, how much plant life exists, or even how many endangered species live in the area, they managed to systematically group each area according to environmental impacts.  (Interestingly, sensitivity to climate change is only qualitatively assessed).  After reading the report, I still had questions about how this information is used.  Do areas deemed as being more sensitive cost more to lease?  Do stricter monitoring and research requirements make it less desirable?  While economics and profitability largely motivate this industry, how might the valuation of these areas change if the public was more aware of this scaled sensitivity scoring? 

Wind farm; NOAA Habitat

Renewable energy technologies are moving forward, but progress is slow.  In the meantime, one thing to do is acknowledge the wealth of information that these oil companies are required to provide in exchange for their activities. These ships collect data ranging from whale abundance to bathymetric mapping that we would not otherwise have.  As oil and gas activities are ramping up in the face of Deep Water Horizon amnesia and growing temptation in the arctic, it is important that we stay informed to support improvements rather than whining about corrupt offshore drilling.  In truth, media dramatization and public outcry shouldn't eclipse the fact that these activities are (largely) monitored and regulated with equal attention and precision as any other necessary resource extraction. 

This only scratches the surface of this topic - what do you know about oil and gas exploration?  

Making Conservation Matter: The Power of Economics

Pacific Islands anemone, NOAA

In the conservation arena, many environmental advocates try to appeal to our sentimental fuzzy feelings to convince us that protecting sea otters, waterfalls, or forests is important for future generations.  However, in doing this, they alienate many members of the public and miss out on the most powerful argument of all: economics.  Because we all do enjoy the great outdoors, things like clean water, safe beaches, and healthy animal populations are valuable.  It seems strange to attach monetary values to something as intangible as enjoying a seaside sunset, but the fact remains that the general public is willing to pay for these aspects of the environment.  Not only do these types of valuation exercises exist, but they underlie many (if not all) resource management decisions that are made worldwide.  Economists often specialize in this type of non-use or existence valuation and conduct studies that lead to reports such as this recent NOAA publication, stating that Hawaii's coral reefs are worth almost $34 billion annually.  Such a large sum holds a lot of sway in political circles and speaks to the power of numbers. 

Sala y Gomez marine reserve, Chile

Similarly, several months ago, Enric Sala (National Geographic Explorer-in-Residence and one of my personal heroes) spoke at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars along with Dr. Jane Lubchenco about using economics to debunk popular ocean conservation myths.  He has visited pristine areas around the world and works in Washington DC to raise awareness about the benefits of marine protected areas.  Using examples from Spain, Kenya, and Mombassa, he shows that MPAs have doubled fisheries income and raised tourist revenue twenty times over.  The largest marine conservation myth that he combats is that MPAs are costly.  Spotlighting Australia's Great Barrier Reef, he shows how tourism revenue is up almost 40%, with management costing a mere 10% of that income (a smart investment to be sure!). 

West coast sunset, Surfrider

Sala's dream is to get a large portion of the ocean protected.  What is enough, you ask?  Of course this is difficult to determine, but the scientific community recommends between 20-50% of the worlds oceans be protected and the UN Convention on Biological Diversity has mandated 10%. Twelve large MPAs account for almost 80% of the world's total protected areas, with almost 4500 smaller reserves dotting coastlines around the globe.  No doubt these smaller reserves are more costly per unit area, but again Sala appeals to the numbers.  To protect 10% of the world's oceans, he estimates the cost at $12 billion per year.  For only an additional $4 billion, 20% could be protected and 1 million jobs would be created.  Interestingly, this $16 billion dollars is the same amount that is spent in bad fishing subsidies per year.  Sala hopes for a combination of government involvement and stakeholder demand to change congressional attitudes toward MPAs around the world.  This economic perspective is increasingly important as we move forward in marine conservation and management. 

Check out the IUCN's global work in MPAs for more information on this topic!

Brown Bag Seminars

As part of our continuing Knauss Brown Bag seminar series, we have two new talks tomorrow at noon in the NOAA Central Library.

First up, Amanda Keledjian (Office of Protected Resources) will tell us all about her work studying sea lion stranding and fisheries interactions during periods of El Nino conditions that are often experienced in the California Current Ecosystem.  This interdisciplinary work brings together oceanography, coastal health, animal mischief, and fisheries - come see what results!

Second, Heidi Geisz (Committee on Natural Resources: Subcommittee on Insular Affairs, Oceans and Wildlife) will talk about her work investigating persistent organic pollutants in the Antarctic environment.  You thought that it was pristine and isolated from the effects of human pollution?  As it turns out, researchers can study pollution within the food web by analyzing animal tissues.  In this case, Heidi studied Adelie penguins!  Come find out what she knows about the contaminants found in one of the most beautiful regions on the planet.

As always, bring your lunch and some stimulating questions for our speakers.

Science Humor

It's Monday, so here's a matrix I think we can all appreciate. 

Bring on the Jobs

It seems to be on every Fellow’s mind at the moment, and conversations among us usually wind up there sooner or later: what are your plans after the fellowship? There are four months to go which makes it a good time to start thinking about our next move. Ten fabulous volunteers with the inside scoop shared their valuable information with us at the 2011 Knauss Career Workshop on Friday.

Resumes and Interviews

Ida Buffone, Recruitment Manager for the contracting company IMSG, kicked things off by providing some tips for constructing an optimal resume and how to impress during the interview that (hopefully) follows.
After lunch a panel of hiring professionals explained some ins and outs of applying to federal jobs and contractors –

•    Ida Buffone, IMSG
•    Jim Saulsbury, 2020
•    Christine Carpino, NOAA

Two take-home messages stood out: be sure your application materials highlight the experiences you have that explicitly satisfy the job description, and network! You never know when who you know will come in handy.

Advice from Knauss Alums

Two panels of Knauss alumni sat down to share their post-fellowship stories. The Senior Managers Panel included two fellows from the class of ’92 and one from the class of ’82 -

•    Lauren Wenzel, Acting Director of the National Marine Protected Areas Center
•    Russell Callendar, Acting Director of NOAA’s National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science
•    Christophe Tulou, Director of the District Department of the Environment

None of these successful Knauss grads entered their current positions or organizations directly after their fellowship. In fact, they had pretty circuitous and diverse paths to their current careers, but they gained unique perspectives along the way. So ask yourself – what skills to I need? You’re not expected to land your dream job in February, just start the path to get there.

Our final panel included former fellows from ’00, ’03, ’05 and ’09 and led to some candid conversations about work-life balance and techniques for advancing your knowledge base (or “pie”) -

•    Jason Goldberg, Fish and Wildlife Biologist in Aquatic Invasive Species USFWS
•    Amanda Leland, National Policy Director of the Environmental Defense Fund’s Oceans Program
•    Kirsten Larsen, National Habitat Science Coordinator in the NMFS Office of Science and Technology
•    Jeb Berman, Director of Government Relations for the National Marine Sanctuary Foundation

This panel stressed again the importance of getting your face, your name and your handshake out there. So if you didn’t have the opportunity to meet our fine panelists on Friday, track them down at the next oceans event, introduce yourself and make a connection. They took time out of their hectic schedules to sit down and help us. The least we can do it take them up on the offer.