A seismic trade association hopes to help craft regulations that protect the interests of those afloat on the surface and those that dwell beneath it.
There's an offshore battle brewing that could have profound implications for the oil and gas industry.
Like many battles, its core is fairly simple. Environmentalists are concerned that the air guns used to create a source in marine seismic surveys may have harmful effects on whales, dolphins and other marine mammals. Regulators are listening to these concerns as they revisit such legislation as the Marine Mammals Protection Act in the United States, which is up for renewal. If regulators are convinced that marine seismic activity in some way connotes harm or disturbance to these creatures, shooting seismic in the world's oceans might get a little more difficult.
But representatives of the seismic industry see a somewhat more sinister motive behind the environmentalists' protests. Few oil companies are going to be willing to invest millions of dollars in a deepwater well before they've had time to examine seismic data. Curtailing marine seismic activity could have serious repercussions throughout the industry.
"The environmental organizations used to target drilling rigs, and they targeted drilling and leasing activity," said Marc Lawrence, senior vice president and division manager for data licensing at Fairfield Industries. "In recent times they've come to realize that if they shut that activity down further upstream, it might be easier for them. They've got to find a method by which to shut us down, and I think they've seized upon this aspect."
Lawrence heads up the Marine Mammals Task Force for the International Association of Geophysical Contractors (IAGC), a group that represents about 200 geophysical companies around the world. The IAGC has involved itself with this issue because its leaders believe they can have an effective impact on the debate by being proactive.
"What often happens is that those who want to shut down E&P activity have been louder, shriller, more dedicated, more passionate, perhaps better funded, perhaps better organized (than their opponents)," said IAGC President Chip Gill. "We as an industry first and foremost are about finding and producing oil and gas, and this other stuff is noise out there. For many of them, it's their life. So we're starting off at a disadvantage, and we have to be smart and proactive to overcome it."
Does seismic activity affect marine mammals? The answer is probably. Does it have adverse effects on them? That's harder to determine. Research is scant, and new discoveries often muddy the waters. For instance, until recently the US Minerals Management Service (MMS) didn't have any constraints on seismic activity in the Gulf of Mexico because it was believed that the whale population there was insignificant. Only recently have researchers discovered that a significant number of sperm whales inhabit the region.
Given what research has determined about human sound tolerance, it's likely that air guns aren't as problematic for whales as other sounds that may be less intense but longer in duration. "The level of sound at a Metallica concert is more detrimental to a human than having someone fire a shotgun 10 ft (3 m) away every 5 seconds," said Philip Fontana, geophysical manager for Veritas DCG's marine data acquisition division.
Fontana is on loan to the IAGC for 8 months to determine how best to confront the naysayers who might hope to steer regulators toward harsh anti-seismic regulations. It's likely that more research is needed, though what form that might take is open to some discussion. It's also likely that the IAGC will attempt to develop a broader coalition rather than trying to fight this battle alone.
"The first thing we have to do is let the regulators and our colleagues in the industry know that we're willing to take on this issue because we're on the front line and consider ourselves to be the acoustic experts and best suited to handle it," Lawrence said. "We want solid science behind it."
Already Fontana has contacted several groups that might have a vested interest in further research, including the scientific community and various environmental organizations. While he's not heard from the environmentalists, the scientists are excited about the prospect. "They see us as a tremendous technical and financial resource to promote and fund the type of research needed to clarify how noise affects marine mammals," he said.
Meanwhile, the regulators need to know that a rational, technically knowledgeable group is ready to argue the industry's case. "Our intention is to put tools in the toolbox, tools that anyone in the E&P industry can use as ammunition in advocating a balanced approach to marine mammal protection," Gill said. "When you talk about advocacy, the tools are things like information, access, reputation and relationships. So credible information becomes key, and the tools we put in the toolbox should be ones that any of us can use to address this debate.
"You do that by looking at the other side and seeing what their claims are. You find gaps in the knowledge base and you fill them. Then you ask for a regulatory approach that's based on sound science but that balances the cost of regulation and protection against clear and necessary benefits."
Meanwhile, it would be nice if the whales would stay in once place long enough to be studied. But they're a peripatetic lot. So, for that matter, are seismic vessels.
"We're not in an area long enough to do long-term studies on the health aspects," Fontana said. "There's an interesting message there."

Comments