Frequency of Dispersant Use Worldwide

Abstract

Chemical dispersant use has been regarded in some areas of the world as a non-traditional response option for open water marine spills. This view is based on the historical prevalence of mechanical response and the additional regulatory or permitting requirements placed on organizations which wish to use dispersants. While such requirements may be a deterrent, the response community underestimates the actual frequency of dispersant use. Based on response reports for maritime spills, the frequency of worldwide dispersant use is summarized over the last four decades. Information is also summarized by the geographic region where the dispersant was applied and using any reports on effectiveness. Effectiveness reports are uneven in quality and, in many cases, absent. This situation underscores the importance of knowing if an oil is dispersible beforehand and monitoring the performance of a dispersant on a spilled oil afterward.

Metagenomic and metatranscriptomic responses of natural oil degrading bacteria in the presence of dispersants

“…For many decades, chemical dispersants have been used in catastrophic oil spills to help augment oil biodegradation rates and minimize the amount of oil accessing shorelines where clean up becomes considerably more problematic (Harris and Chris, ; Law and Carole, ; Henry and Charlie, ; Steen et al, ; Bejarano et al, ). Application of dispersants lowers the interfacial tension between oil and water leading to oil emulsification into tiny droplets which in turn increase bioavailability of crude oil to natural hydrocarbon degraders.…”

Environmental Impacts of the Deep-Water Oil and Gas Industry: A Review to Guide Management Strategies

“…Globally, there have been over 200 documented instances of dispersant use between 1968 and 2007 (Steen, 2008). Dispersant applications typically are successful in dispersing large oil aggregations, although their effectiveness varies with oil composition, mixing dynamics, temperature, salinity, and the presence of light (Weaver, 2004;Henry, 2005;NRC, 2005;Chandrasekar et al, 2006;Kuhl et al, 2013).…”

Regulatory policies for using oil dispersants in the Barents Sea

“…Applying dispersants as an OSR strategy has been gaining an increasing level of acceptance from worldwide authorities (Lunel 2001;Steen & Findlay 2008). The change in attitude is largely due to the reduction in toxicity of commercially available dispersants, and in part because conventional mechanical methods have definite limitations (Lyons & Castaneda 2005;Guevarra 2011).…”

“…For instance, countries adjacent to the Baltic Sea, which are the contracted parties to the Helsinki Convention, have agreed to HELCOM Recommendation 22/2, which states that ''mechanical means are the preferred response measures in the Baltic Sea, and that chemical agents may only be used in exceptional cases, after authorisation has been granted in each individual case'' (Helsinki Commission 2001: 154). The Helsinki Convention allows the use of dispersants only with very strict limitations due to the shallow water depths and limited water exchange in the Baltic Sea (Steen & Findlay 2008;Lampela & Jolma 2011). There are no comparable Russian or Norwegian recommendations relating to the use of dispersants in the Barents Sea (Belkina 2013).…”

“…This creates a need for adapting alternative tactics, such as using dispersants, which can be applied from ships or aircraft. Use of dispersants has the potential to treat larger and more remote spills quickly (Steen & Findlay 2008;Coelho et al 2011;Knol & Arbo 2014).…”